Seed World

Reagan Reed has a way of describing his research that might make a plant breeder pause.

“I’m the sort of person who likes to break things to understand them,” he says.

What he breaks are genes involved in seed germination. Reed, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California, Davis, is investigating whether changing those genes can help seeds establish healthy plants under a wider range of conditions.

Reed recently attended the National Association for Plant Breeding meeting in College Station, Texas, as an NAPB Borlaug Scholar. His work speaks to a question that matters well beyond a research lab: what does it take for a seed to get a crop off to a strong start?

A seed that germinates quickly, alongside the others planted with it, spends less time vulnerable to stresses before seedlings become established.

“If you’re able to bridge that gap between germination to stand establishment, then that’s going to give you the highest probability of having a solid yield that year,” Reed says. “There’s a bunch that can go wrong after that, but it maximises your yield from the start, at least.”

Reed works in Dr. Imtiyaz Khanday’s lab at UC Davis, where his research focuses on seed quality in tomatoes and potatoes. He brings an unusual academic background to the work: at Skidmore College, he studied both biology and Latin.

Reed believes that combination prepared him for research. Translating an ancient text means studying each word, weighing its possible meanings and using context to reach the best interpretation. There is rarely a way to know with complete certainty what an author intended. Science, he says, requires a similar willingness to work through uncertainty.

“Attention to detail and comfortability working with uncertainty,” is how he sums up what Latin taught him.

In the lab, uncertainty can produce a surprise. Reed describes changing one gene and seeing little effect. Changing a second gene also appears to do little. Put both changes in the same genetic background, though, and the result can be substantial.

“I break this gene, nothing really happens. I break this other gene, nothing really happens. I combine them into the same genetic background, and now there’s a massive effect,” he says.

Those interactions matter as researchers gain the ability to edit multiple genes at once. They also complicate any simple account of how a trait works: improving a seed may depend on understanding what several genes do together.

For Reed, the question is whether that knowledge could help seeds germinate reliably when conditions are difficult. Some of the genes he studies prevent germination under certain conditions. That response may serve a plant well in one setting while limiting its usefulness in agriculture. He wants to learn what happens when those genes are changed, and whether the result improves establishment.

Yet a discovery that works in a lab still has a long way to travel before it reaches a field. Reed argues that agricultural biotechnology faces an economic challenge as well as a scientific one. New tools can create value for farmers, he says, but developing them requires a way to support the work in an industry where margins can be thin.

His fellowship with Flagship Pioneering gave him a view across AI, agriculture-related work and human health research. It also reinforced the importance of bringing people with different expertise into the same conversation—a benefit of gatherings such as the NAPB meeting.

“You need to have a team of people with different backgrounds who are willing to work together and approach the same problem in different perspectives and different ways,” he says.

That thinking connects the different parts of Reed’s path. Latin taught him to examine details without expecting a perfect answer. Gene editing lets him test what individual genes do—and what happens when their effects combine. Working with people beyond his own field helps him ask what those findings could become.

He came to agriculture because of its reach: the possibility that work by a small group of researchers could eventually make a difference on a much larger scale. His immediate focus is smaller and more precise. He wants to understand what helps a seed get through its first days and become a healthy plant.

For a farmer, that may be where a better crop begins.

The post Can Gene Editing Give Seeds a Stronger Start? appeared first on Seed World.

As Canada scales back public agricultural research, young scientists are facing questions that extend beyond their next job. Is there still a place for them to build a career here—or will they have to look elsewhere?

In a new episode of the Seed World podcast, Ben Erickson reflects on that uncertainty and what it could mean for the future of Canadian plant breeding.

See, he wasn’t planning on going back to school.

After graduating from the University of Guelph with distinction, Erickson joined the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) soybean breeding program in Ottawa, Ont., spending two years working on food-grade soybeans, climate-smart cropping systems and genomic breeding tools.

Then, in 2025, major cuts to AAFC research facilities were announced to meet federal budget saving targets.

“This was the event that influenced me to return to my studies,” he says.

For Erickson, the cuts ultimately led to a new opportunity. But his experience also raises a larger question: when early-career researchers encounter fewer paths forward in Canada, where will they go to pursue their work?

Today, Erickson is pursuing a master’s of science at McGill University, tackling one of soybean breeding’s most persistent problems: developing durable resistance to Sclerotinia stem rot.

White mould is among Canada’s most economically damaging diseases in soybean, canola and pulse crops, with severe outbreaks causing yield losses of 50% or more. For breeders, the challenge is finding plants that remain resistant against genetically diverse pathogen populations.

Rather than screening soybean lines against a single fungal isolate, he is evaluating 34 lines against 10 genetically distinct isolates collected across the country. Combined with genomic data, the work could identify stable resistance and provide breeders with useful parent lines, candidate genes and improved screening methods—the kind of expertise Canada will need to retain as agricultural challenges grow more complex.

When Tanya Copley hired him at the Centre de recherche sur les grains inc. (CÉROM), she knew about his extensive field experience but was struck by how quickly he adapted to laboratory work.

McGill professor Jacqueline Bede sees broader potential in his work. She says Erickson’s “matrix” approach — testing soybean resistance against multiple pathogen isolates from across Canada — could generate insights useful not only for soybean breeding, but for disease-resistance research in other crops.

Whether researchers like Erickson will be able to build their futures in Canada remains an open question. In the podcast, he speaks candidly about the changing research landscape, what continues to draw him to public plant breeding and how far he may be willing to go to find his next opportunity.

Listen to the full Seed World podcast episode to hear Erickson’s perspective on what Canada stands to lose—and what might convince the next generation of plant breeders to stay.

Ben Erickson is the fourth in our series of 7 Future Builders of Plant Breeding. Read all about Yue Yu, Shruti Kashyap and Luke Dojack!

The post Could Research Cuts Push Canada’s Young Plant Breeders Elsewhere? appeared first on Seed World.

Artificial intelligence dominated the official agenda when plant breeders gathered at Texas A&M University in June for the annual meeting of the National Association for Plant Breeding.

But beneath the conversations about genomics, phenomics and machine learning was a more human question: What kind of people will be needed to turn those technologies into better products for farmers?

In a special Texas-themed edition of the Seed World Podcast, Corteva Agriscience corn breeder Zachary Jones offers an answer rooted in teamwork, communication and a clear sense of purpose.

Jones, who received the NAPB Early Career Scientist Award in 2025, works with genomic prediction and other tools designed to improve breeding efficiency and accelerate product development. He has already experienced one of the defining moments in a breeder’s career: seeing products he helped develop reach the commercial market.

“You get this really cool opportunity to see all the hard work that you put in across years actually deliver for the customer,” he says.

For Jones, that work is deeply connected to his upbringing on approximately 50 acres of red soil in Spring Garden, Alabama. Plant breeding gave him a way to use science in service of rural places like the one that raised him.

“When I think about my passion for this industry, it’s a way to use science to help people in rural communities,” he says.

One of the most influential moments in his career happened long before he encountered genomic prediction. In seventh grade, agricultural science teacher Dennis Tierce asked Jones and his classmates to stand and recite part of the FFA Creed. Tierce’s encouragement helped Jones develop the confidence to speak publicly—a skill that now allows him to explain complex science to growers, policymakers and the public.

“The science, honestly, is table stakes,” Jones says. “The thing that really makes a difference in modern plant breeding is being able not only to understand the science, but to communicate it.”

In the podcast episode, Jones discusses the mentor who changed his trajectory, the feeling of seeing his first commercial hybrid in farmers’ fields and why the graduate students he met at NAPB give him confidence in the profession’s future.

The technologies transforming plant breeding may be new. The qualities needed to use them well remain distinctly human.

Listen to the Seed World Podcast for the full conversation with Zachary Jones.

The post A Big Lesson from NAPB ’26: Technology Isn’t Enough appeared first on Seed World.

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it. The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere, and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026-27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson, one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group, a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult, and particularly costly, to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not just how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines, far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s. But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses. That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”

The post You Can Process More Lines. You Can’t Automate Better Ideas. appeared first on Seed World.

Plant breeding is getting faster.

Genomic prediction can help identify promising plants before breeders spend years evaluating them. Better computing, environmental data and genomic tools are giving researchers information that previous generations of breeders simply didn’t have. But there’s a catch: breeding a variety faster doesn’t necessarily mean farmers get it faster.

That distinction is becoming increasingly important as researchers explore just how much time technology can remove from the breeding process.

Yue Yu, a researcher at the University of British Columbia, works at the intersection of genomics, plant breeding and environmental adaptation. Her research has included lodgepole pine and sunflower, using genomic information to understand how plants respond to their environments and how breeders might make better decisions earlier.

The possibilities are significant. But Yue says biology remains stubbornly complicated.

“The question is always about how accurate are these predictions?” she says.

Some traits are much easier to predict than others. A trait controlled largely by a single gene presents a different challenge than one influenced by many genes and their interaction with the environment.

That means even sophisticated genomic predictions still need something decidedly old-fashioned: plants growing in the real world.

“A lot of my work still includes the validation that requires phenotypic data, which includes some of these long field trials to back up the results that we got from these innovative genomic tools,” Yue says.

Field testing, she adds, remains a “gold standard” for determining whether those predictions actually work.

That doesn’t diminish the potential value of genomic prediction. Yue has already seen what it can do in lodgepole pine, where researchers have decades of field data against which genomic predictions can be tested.

“I would say our prediction accuracy is about 60 to 70%,” she says.

Those genetic results are already being incorporated into breeding decisions and conservation planning in British Columbia.

The implication for crop breeding is intriguing.

If breeders can identify poor candidates earlier, they can potentially concentrate their field testing, money and time on material with a greater probability of success. The objective isn’t necessarily to eliminate field trials. It is to become much better at deciding what deserves to enter those trials in the first place.

Could prediction eventually become so good that some field trials disappear? Yue can imagine it — eventually.

“If we do get to know everything in the end, yes, I could see how field trials could be in the history book,” she says.

But she quickly adds a significant qualifier. “I don’t think we will see that in our lifetime, at least.”

One place breeders may find useful information is in wild relatives of modern crops.

Agriculture has spent generations selecting plants for characteristics such as yield, quality and uniformity. That process produced extraordinarily productive crops, but selection can also narrow the genetic diversity available to breeders.

Wild relatives have faced a different kind of selection pressure. Drought. Heat. Disease. Pests. Unpredictable environments. Yue describes those plants as holding “untapped potential” for breeding.

“They actually have so much,” she says, pointing particularly to genetic diversity associated with biotic and abiotic resistance.

That diversity could become increasingly valuable as breeders try to develop crops for environments that themselves are becoming harder to predict. And therein lies one of modern breeding’s great paradoxes: our ability to predict plant performance is improving at precisely the moment the environment we are predicting may be becoming less predictable.

“If you don’t know where the goal is, you don’t know where to run to,” Yue says.

Breeding for an anticipated future climate takes years and considerable resources. If that future unfolds differently than expected, breeders risk investing enormous effort in solving the wrong problem.

New technology promises to shorten at least some of those timelines. But Yue cautions against treating speed itself as the objective. There are situations where speed is essential. If an important crop variety becomes vulnerable to a new disease or other threat affecting farmers across a large region, breeders may need every available tool to respond quickly.

“But I also think faster can be a dangerous thing,” Yue says.

Moving too quickly without understanding the underlying biology — or without adequately determining whether a variety performs consistently — can come at the expense of quality.

“It’s really a balance between the speed of breeding as well as the quality,” she says.

That balance points toward a larger issue in the race to accelerate crop development. Even if technology dramatically shortens the breeding cycle, breeding is only one part of the journey to market.

Once breeders have developed promising material, it still has to navigate the processes that allow it to reach farmers.

“The whole breeding process itself can be lengthy, but a lot of time it’s also the downstream part,” Yue says.

That includes steps such as registering a variety, releasing it and making it legally available for sale domestically or internationally.

“That downstream process also takes a lot of time,” she says.

It changes the way the industry needs to think about breeding speed. If genomic prediction, computational tools and other technologies remove years from one part of variety development while the downstream system remains unchanged, the bottleneck may simply move.

From a farmer’s perspective, what ultimately matters isn’t how quickly a breeder can identify promising genetics. It is how quickly those genetics become a proven variety that can actually be planted.

“The technology is great. It’s providing so much more, and it could accelerate things compared to traditional breeding,” Yu says.

The post Can Genomics Speed Up the Journey From Breeder to Farmer? appeared first on Seed World.

As climate change reshapes growing conditions around the world, scientists are beginning to ask a question that could have major implications for agriculture: Will crops defend themselves against disease the same way they do in the future as they do today?

That’s the focus of the latest episode of the Seed World Podcast, featuring Neha Paserkar, a PhD candidate in plant science at McGill University and one of this year’s recipients of the Canadian Plant Breeding Innovation Scholarship.

Paserkar’s research centres on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, better known as white mold, one of the most persistent and economically important diseases affecting crops including canola, soybean, sunflower and dry beans.

“The pathogen produces structures called sclerotia that can survive in the soil for years,” Paserkar explains on the podcast. “That makes it very difficult to manage.”

But her work goes well beyond understanding today’s disease pressure. She’s investigating how rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could alter the molecular interactions between plants and pathogens, potentially changing how disease resistance works in future crop varieties.

“We assume that the way the plant and the pathogen react today, they won’t respond the same way in the future or under higher carbon dioxide conditions,” she says. “This research will help us understand how to make crops more climate resilient.”

To answer those questions, Paserkar combines greenhouse research with genome-wide association studies, transcriptomics and bioinformatics to identify genes linked to disease resistance. The goal is to provide plant breeders with better tools to develop resistant varieties more efficiently.

“The genomics helps identify genomic regions associated with important traits, while transcriptomics shows what is happening at the gene level,” she says. “Combining these approaches gives more precise results that can directly help plant breeders develop more resistant cultivars.”

The episode also explores Paserkar’s personal journey into plant breeding. Originally pursuing a PhD in China, her research was interrupted when COVID-19 border closures prevented her from returning to complete her experiments. Rather than abandoning her work, she spent that time building expertise in genomics and bioinformatics before restarting her research at McGill.

“It taught me that you should be ready for uncertainty and be resilient and flexible enough for whatever comes next,” she says.

That experience also shaped her view of the future of plant science, where researchers must combine traditional breeding knowledge with advanced data analysis.

“For future scientists, it’s equally important to understand molecular biology and greenhouse experiments while also learning data-driven techniques,” she says. “Together, they help us solve increasingly complex problems.”

Despite the challenges, Paserkar says her motivation remains simple: helping agriculture become more sustainable.

“If you tackle disease resistance, you can directly improve crop production,” she says. “That contributes to sustainable agriculture and strengthens our food system.”

The episode offers listeners an inside look at the next generation of plant breeding research—and why preparing crops for tomorrow’s climate begins with understanding how plants respond to today’s changing environment.

The Canadian Plant Breeding Innovation Scholarship is made possible by Alberta Grains, the Canadian Seed Growers’ Association, FP Genetics, HyTech Production, Richardson, SaskWheat Development Commission, SeCan, Seeds Canada, Seed World Canada, and Warburtons.

The post Can Crops Keep Fighting White Mold in a Changing Climate? appeared first on Seed World.

When Anirup Sengupta talks about plant breeding on this week’s episode of the Seed World Canada Podcast, he reaches for an analogy almost anyone can understand.

“Without a reference genome,” he says, “breeding is a bit like trying to assemble a massive puzzle without seeing the picture on the box.”

It’s a fitting description of the challenge he has chosen to tackle as a PhD student at the University of Saskatchewan, where he works with the Crop Development Centre and the Global Institute for Food Security. Originally from West Bengal, India, Sengupta is one of three recipients of the 2026 Canadian Plant Breeding Innovation Scholarship, an award recognizing graduate students advancing the future of plant breeding and genetics.

His research focuses on cicer milkvetch, a perennial forage legume valued for its nutritional quality and ability to reduce frothy bloat in grazing livestock. Despite those advantages, the crop has never reached its full potential because of poor germination, weak seedling establishment, and limited genomic resources.

“My research is about providing plant breeders with a much more detailed roadmap to improve crops faster and more efficiently,” Sengupta says.

The cornerstone of that roadmap is the crop’s first reference genome—a complete genetic blueprint that allows researchers to identify genes associated with traits such as seedling vigour, forage yield, disease resistance, and stress tolerance.

But that’s only part of the picture.

Sengupta is also analyzing the crop’s genetic diversity and applying genomic selection, an increasingly important tool that uses DNA markers and predictive models to identify promising breeding lines long before years of field testing are complete.

“Instead of waiting several growing seasons,” he explains, “breeders can make decisions much earlier, save a lot of time and resources in the breeding program, and help accelerate genetic gains.”

Traditional breeding remains the foundation of crop improvement, but today’s breeders have access to tools previous generations could scarcely imagine.

For Sengupta, the future lies in combining—not replacing—those approaches.

“The future of crop improvement would be to combine the strengths of traditional breeding, the breeders’ knowledge and expertise, with genomics, AI, and big data approaches,” he says. “It is not basically replacing the breeders. It is giving them much more precise tools to make faster and smarter decisions.”

That philosophy reflects a broader transformation happening across agriculture, where advances in sequencing technology, computational biology, machine learning, and environmental data are making breeding increasingly predictive rather than purely observational.

Despite publishing scientific papers, presenting internationally, and earning conference awards early in his career, Sengupta doesn’t attribute his success to technical ability alone.

“I think one of the biggest factors that drives me is curiosity and consistency,” he says. “Research can be challenging because results don’t always work the way you want them to work, but having this curiosity kind of helps you stay motivated.”

That curiosity extends well beyond the laboratory. Conferences, outreach, teaching, and leadership roles have all become essential parts of his development as a scientist.

“A lot of growth happens outside the regular coursework or experiments,” he says.

Yet he also offers a note of caution for young researchers eager to embrace every new technology.

“As young researchers, we naturally get excited about new technologies,” Sengupta says. “But sometimes that can lead to a situation where we almost have a solution looking for a problem.”

Instead, he believes the science should always begin with the biological question.

“It’s better to start with the important biological or agricultural questions first,” he says. “Technology is a tool. It’s not the final objective of your work.”

Modern plant scientists increasingly work at the intersection of field biology and computational science.

For Sengupta, success depends on understanding both.

“Agriculture is ultimately field-driven,” he says. “At the same time, genomics and computational biology are giving us incredibly powerful tools to understand plant traits at a much deeper level. We need both perspectives working hand in hand with each other.”

That balance ensures that sophisticated genomic predictions remain grounded in real-world agricultural challenges rather than existing only on a computer screen.

Equally important is communication.

“Research only creates impact when people understand and apply it,” Sengupta says. “As researchers, we often work with highly technical concepts, but ultimately our work affects farmers, industry, policymakers, students, and the public.”

It’s why he has devoted time to teaching, graduate student leadership, mentoring, and outreach throughout his academic career. Explaining science clearly, he believes, makes both the research—and the researcher—better.

As sequencing becomes less expensive and computational tools become more accessible, Sengupta believes plant genomics is entering a new era.

“We are entering a period where plant science is becoming far more precise, predictive, and connected than ever before,” he says.

The implications extend well beyond any single crop.

“Plant genomics will not solve everything on its own,” Sengupta says, “but I believe it will be one of the most important tools that helps agriculture adapt to the challenges that we are facing in the real world right now.”

Looking ahead, he sees enormous promise in the convergence of genomics, artificial intelligence, and increasingly accessible sequencing technologies.

“We are entering a period where plant science is becoming far more precise, predictive, and connected than ever before,” he says. “Advances in plant genomics are giving us the ability to understand crops at an incredibly detailed level—from individual genes all the way to how plants interact with changing environments.”

Those advances, he believes, won’t simply produce better crops. They could reshape how agriculture responds to some of its biggest challenges, from climate change to global food security.

“Plant genomics will not solve everything on its own,” Anirup says, “but I believe it will be one of the most important tools that helps agriculture adapt to the challenges we are facing in the real world right now.”

The Canadian Plant Breeding Innovation Scholarship is made possible by Alberta Grains, the Canadian Seed Growers’ Association, FP Genetics, HyTech Production, Richardson, SaskWheat Development Commission, SeCan, Seeds Canada, Seed World Canada, and Warburtons.

The post The Scholarship Winner Helping Rewrite the Future of Crop Genetics appeared first on Seed World.

Few people embody that reality better than Dr. Weikai Yan, recipient of the 2026 Plant Breeding and Genetics Award, sponsored by Seed World Canada and Seeds Canada.

Over a career spanning more than four decades, Yan has worked across China, the United States and Canada, building a reputation not only as an accomplished oat breeder but also as one of the world’s leading experts on genotype-by-environment interaction — the complex relationship between genetics and growing conditions that influences crop performance.

Yan’s journey into plant breeding began in China, where he studied plant breeding as an undergraduate before pursuing graduate studies and working alongside some of the country’s leading crop scientists. Opportunities at Cornell University and later the University of Guelph deepened his interest in genotype-by-environment interaction, a field that would become central to his research career.

Since joining Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Ottawa, Yan has helped lead Canada’s oat breeding efforts while developing analytical tools and methodologies that have been adopted by plant breeders around the world.

While many researchers are best known for either the varieties they develop or the scientific advances they create, Yan points to both as defining contributions. His breeding program has released numerous oat cultivars adapted to different production regions, while his research has helped breeders better understand how crops respond to varying environments and management conditions.

Looking ahead, Yan sees technologies such as genomic selection, phenomics and artificial intelligence playing increasingly important roles in crop improvement. These tools, he says, can help breeders make better decisions earlier in the breeding process and improve the efficiency of breeding programs.

At the same time, he believes technology will complement—not replace—the expertise of plant breeders.

“Human plant breeders are still essential,” Yan says. “They have to ask the right questions and judge whether the results are valid.”

Despite advances in technology, Yan says one challenge remains unchanged: the need for long-term investment. Plant breeding requires patience, sustained funding and a commitment to future outcomes. As climate variability increases and expectations from growers and end users continue to rise, that commitment will become even more important.

Yan’s career serves as a reminder that plant breeding is about more than developing new varieties. It is about creating knowledge, building tools and helping future generations of breeders solve increasingly complex challenges.

The post A Lifetime in Plant Breeding: Dr. Weikai Yan Honoured for Four Decades of Scientific Leadership appeared first on Seed World.

Some crop varieties achieve instant success. Others succeed because someone gave them one more chance.

That was the case for CDC Meadow, the yellow pea variety developed at the University of Saskatchewan’s Crop Development Centre (CDC) and named 2026 Seed of the Year. Released in 2006, CDC Meadow went on to become one of the most widely grown yellow pea varieties in Canadian history, helping drive the growth of Canada’s pulse industry for nearly two decades.

According to breeder Dr. Tom Warkentin, the variety’s commercial uptake was remarkably fast. After seed multiplication, CDC Meadow became the most widely grown yellow pea variety in Western Canada by 2011. While it initially gained traction in Saskatchewan, Alberta eventually became its strongest market thanks in part to its slightly earlier maturity.

The story of CDC Meadow began long before its release. The original cross was made in 1996 by Dr. Bert Vandenberg, years before Warkentin joined the CDC. From there, the breeding line moved through years of testing and selection, supported by researchers, technical staff, Saskatchewan Pulse Growers, and seed growers across the Prairies.

But the variety nearly didn’t make it.

Two years before entering cooperative trials, the breeding line — known then as 6538 — had a solid but unspectacular season. Warkentin’s evaluation gave it one star instead of two, enough to keep it moving forward. Had it received no stars, it likely would have been discarded.

The following year, it rose to the top of the trial results.

“It’s sort of okay, but not outstanding in that one particular year,” Warkentin recalled. “The next year it was right at the top of the pack.”

Today, CDC Meadow is recognized not only for its commercial success but also for what it represents about plant breeding. While modern breeders now use tools such as DNA markers, near-infrared spectroscopy, and genomic selection, Warkentin says the fundamentals remain the same: making crosses, evaluating thousands of plots, and selecting the best material in the field.

Looking ahead, one of the biggest priorities for pea breeding is improving resistance to root rot diseases, particularly Aphanomyces root rot. Warkentin says several promising lines are currently advancing through trials and could help improve resistance while maintaining the yield and quality growers expect.

For young breeders hoping to develop the next breakthrough variety, his advice is straightforward: get out of the office and into the field.

“Don’t miss a season. Don’t miss a crossing cycle. Just keep at it.”

CDC Meadow’s recognition as the 2026 Seed of the Year is a fitting tribute to a variety that helped shape Canadian pea production. And perhaps the most remarkable part of its story is that it all hinged on a single decision—a breeding line that earned one star instead of none.

Sometimes innovation only needs one more chance.

The post How CDC Meadow Became One of Canada’s Most Successful Yellow Pea Varieties appeared first on Seed World.

Canada’s wheat and barley breeding system is facing a critical turning point, as major farm organizations, universities and industry stakeholders are discussing the optimal future for cereal breeding in Western Canada.

This month, a coalition that includes the Canadian Wheat Research Coalition (CWRC), the Canadian Barley Research Coalition, Seeds Canada and Prairie universities released a joint vision statement calling for stronger collaboration, long-term investment and greater integration of advanced breeding technologies.

The effort comes amid growing concern about Canada’s ability to maintain public breeding capacity and remain competitive in global crop innovation. Industry groups have warned that cuts to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada research capacity could threaten the country’s long-term position in wheat breeding.

At the centre of the discussion is a key question: how can Canada continue delivering the next generation of high-performing wheat and barley varieties farmers need to stay profitable and competitive?

For Jocelyn Velestuk, chair of the Canadian Wheat Research Coalition and a Saskatchewan farmer, the answer starts with collaboration.

“We had all the major players in the wheat breeding sector at the table, which is a really important step as we move forward,” Velestuk says on the latest episode of the Seed World Canada podcast. The resulting vision statement and guiding principles outline priorities including attracting public and private investment, improving farmer choice and ensuring sustainable returns on investment.

Velestuk says the conversation is especially important at a time when farmers are dealing with tight margins, evolving pest pressures and increasing production risks.

“We need a wheat breeding innovation system in Canada that can keep up with that and really keep providing those tools to farmers,” she says, pointing to innovations such as midge-tolerant wheat as examples of the value modern breeding can deliver.

While the long-term structure of the system is still being discussed, industry leaders say more stakeholders will be brought into the conversation in the months ahead. The broader goal is to build a system capable of attracting talent, supporting innovation and delivering measurable results for producers.

Despite the challenges, Velestuk remains optimistic.

“An inflection point is how I look at it,” she said. “We’re at a point right now where we can make those changes and create something better.”

The post Why Canadian Farmers are Leading Discussions on a New Wheat Breeding Model appeared first on Seed World.