Search

The natural genetic diversity of agricultural species is an essential genetic resource for breeding programs aiming to improve their ecosystem and production services. A large natural ecotype diversity is usually available for most grassland species. This could be used to recombine natural climatic adaptations and agronomic value to create improved populations of grassland species adapted to future regional climates. However describing natural genetic resources can be long and costly. Molecular markers may provide useful information to help this task. This opportunity was investigated for Lolium perenne L., using a set of 385 accessions from the natural diversity of this species collected right across Europe and provided by genebanks of several countries. For each of these populations, genotyping provided the allele frequencies of 189,781 SNP markers. GWAS were implemented for over 30 agronomic and/or putatively adaptive traits recorded in three climatically contrasted locations (France, Belgium, Germany). Significant associations were detected for hundreds of markers despite a strong confounding effect of the genetic background; most of them pertained to phenology traits. It is likely that genetic variability in these traits has had an important contribution to environmental adaptation and ecotype differentiation. Genomic prediction models calibrated using natural diversity were found to be highly effective to describe natural populations for almost all traits as well as commercial synthetic populations for some important traits such as disease resistance, spring growth or phenological traits. These results will certainly be valuable information to help the use of natural genetic resources of other species.

Water stock monitoring is a major issue for society on a local and global scale. Sentinel-1&2 satellites provide frequent acquisitions to track water surface dynamics, proxy variables to enable water surface volume monitoring. How do we combine such observations along time for each sensor? What advantages and disadvantages of single-date, monthly or time-windowed estimations? In this context, we analysed the impact of merging information through different types and lengths of time-windows. Satellite observations were processed separately on optical (Sentinel-2) and radar (Sentinel-1) water detectors at 10 m resolution. The analysis has been applied at two scales. First, validating with 26 large scenes (110 × 110 km) in different climatic zones in France, time-windows yielded an improvement on radar detection (F1-score improved from 0.72 to 0.8 for 30 days on average logic) while optical performances remained stable (F1-score 0.89). Second, validating reservoir area estimations with 29 instrumented reservoirs (20–1250 ha), time-windows presented in all cases an improvement on both optical and radar error for any window length (5–30 days). The mean relative absolute error in optical area detection improved from 16.9% on single measurements to 12.9% using 15 days time-windows, and from 22.15% to 15.1% in radar detection). Regarding reservoir filling rates, we identified an increased negative bias for both sensors when the reservoir is nearly full. This work helped to compare accuracies of separate optical and radar capabilities, where optical statistically outperforms radar at both local and large scale to the detriment of less frequent measurements. Furthermore, we propose a geomorphological indicator of reservoirs to predict the quality of radar area monitoring (R2 = 0.58). In conclusion, we suggest the use of time-windows on operational water mapping or reservoir monitoring systems, using 10–20 days time-windows with average logic, providing more frequent and faster information to water managers in periods of crisis (e.g., water shortage) compared to monthly estimations.