Add offer

The history of seed banks: Vavilov, diversity and Svalbard

From Vavilov’s expeditions to Svalbard: the history of seed banks, centres of diversity, collection storage and the recovery of ICARDA’s resources.

1920s–1930s: Vavilov’s programme; 2008: Svalbard opens · Leningrad/St Petersburg and worldwide collections; Svalbard, Norway · Science & experiments

A seed bank preserves living material from which plants can be grown again. Its value lies in safeguarding diversity for research, breeding and future agriculture, rather than stockpiling food. During the 1920s and 1930s, Nikolai Vavilov played an important role in developing the scientific collection and evaluation of crops and their wild relatives. The Svalbard facility, opened in 2008, belongs to a much later chapter: an international system of safety duplicates that complements the work of active genebanks.

An expedition continued after the plants were collected

Vavilov combined research on plant resistance with an interest in the geographical variation of crops. His expeditions, developing from a journey to Iran and the Pamirs in 1916, sought material that could be compared and used in breeding. Landraces, less widely cultivated forms and wild relatives of useful plants all mattered. A sample was not valuable simply because it came from far away; its characteristics and information about its environment and use were also important.

Collectors did not create the diversity they encountered on farms from nothing. Many populations reflected generations of local farmers’ work, seed exchange and adjustment of cultivation to particular needs. Scientific collections placed this living material within a new comparative framework. The history of genebanks should therefore include both named researchers and the people whose knowledge and everyday selection maintained varied plants before they entered an institutional collection. Understanding that relationship gives the expedition its agricultural context, rather than treating collecting as the discovery of an empty landscape.

A centre of diversity is not necessarily one point of origin

In 1926, Vavilov published an influential work on the centres of origin of cultivated plants. He developed the idea that concentrations of diversity could help identify regions important to crop history and guide further searches for material. His maps and the number of centres he distinguished changed as research progressed. A single version of the scheme should therefore not be presented as a fixed theory that he created once and merely repeated thereafter.

Later researchers identified limitations in equating the greatest diversity with the original place of domestication. Plants were moved, crossed and diversified further after leaving earlier cultivation areas. One crop can have several regions containing important diversity. Vavilov’s contribution consequently also lies in setting a research agenda. The map helped formulate questions and plan collecting, but it could not substitute for archaeological evidence, genetic analysis or investigation of individual populations. Refining the theory preserves its value as a productive historical contribution without treating every boundary as a final answer.

From a collection of specimens to a working resource

The basic unit in a scientific genebank is an accession. It can represent a cultivar, a breeding line or a sample of a population collected at a particular location. Its identifier provides a durable connection between the material and its records. The number of accessions is therefore not automatically the number of species or unique varieties: collections can contain related samples, similar material or duplicates maintained for security.

The development of the collection associated with Vavilov involved evaluating material under different conditions as well as storing it. Knowing that a plant survived in one place does not establish its usefulness in another region. Observations, descriptions of traits and the ability to return to the correct sample are all necessary. A genebank is thus an infrastructure connecting living resources with knowledge. Losing a label or assigning the wrong origin can reduce a collection’s value even when the seeds themselves still germinate well. Documentation is part of conservation, not an optional administrative addition.

Vavilov’s persecution and the people protecting collections

Vavilov was arrested in 1940 amid Stalinist terror and an intensifying attack on genetics. Trofim Lysenko, supported by the authorities, attacked opponents through ideological accusations and promises of rapid agricultural transformation. This was not an ordinary contest between equally supported theories settled through experimentation. Vavilov died in Saratov prison on 26 January 1943 after severe deprivation and malnutrition. The comprehensive administrative imposition of Lysenkoism in 1948 occurred after his death.

Protecting the collection during the siege of Leningrad was a separate, parallel history. Staff maintained material despite hunger and wartime danger, and some died. Vavilov was not directing the rescue on site, because he was imprisoned. Keeping these events distinct does justice both to his fate and to the efforts of the team. The survival of genetic resources was not an achievement of an anonymous building or solely of a celebrated founder. It depended on people carrying out difficult work in extreme conditions, whose contribution should remain visible alongside the broader institutional story.

Why low temperatures do not solve every storage problem

Many crops produce seeds that tolerate drying and storage at low temperatures, known as orthodox seeds. Appropriate preparation, sealed packaging and cold conditions can extend their lifespan considerably. Ageing does not, however, disappear. Performance also depends on the species, the initial quality of a seed lot, conditions during maturation and handling before it entered storage. There is no single reliable expiry date that can be assigned to all seeds simply because they have been placed in a genebank.

A systematic review published in 2020 found substantial differences between materials and storage conditions, and reasons for caution about very optimistic predictions. Germination is therefore checked, and regeneration planned before a sample loses its value. Some species produce seeds that respond poorly to substantial drying or conventional cold storage. These plants, and material maintained vegetatively, require other forms of conservation, including field collections, in vitro cultures and appropriately developed cryopreservation methods. Preserving crop diversity consequently demands several biological approaches rather than one storage technology.

Regenerating a sample while maintaining its identity

Stored seeds sometimes need to be grown to produce a fresh lot. This is not simply a matter of multiplying a random handful of material. Mix-ups, unwanted crossing and changes caused by using too few plants must be limited. The aim is to maintain a representative accession, rather than inadvertently select a new variety. Plant health, documentation and copies held at another location are equally important. Each stage can preserve the original resource or gradually narrow what remains of it.

This work explains why a genebank requires continuing expertise, regeneration facilities and funding, rather than a one-off purchase of freezers. Collections outside a plant’s original environment complement the protection of wild populations and the maintenance of diverse crops by farmers. A stored sample provides a way to return to particular material, but cannot replace the entire environment in which plants continue responding to change. Different conservation approaches address different risks and are most effective as a connected system. Maintaining that connection is an ongoing agricultural task.

Svalbard in 2008: a backup alongside active genebanks

The Svalbard Global Seed Vault opened on 26 February 2008 near Longyearbyen in Norway. Its chambers were excavated inside a mountain, and prepared seeds are kept at approximately −18°C using a refrigeration system. Permafrost contributes to the location’s natural protection, but the facility is not without technical equipment or maintenance needs. It was designed for the long-term storage of duplicates, rather than for the everyday work of field experimentation and plant evaluation.

Depositors retain ownership of their material. Under the arrangement known as black-box storage, the institution that placed a deposit can retrieve it. Svalbard does not thereby take control of worldwide breeding or routinely distribute material to everyone who requests it. Active genebanks remain responsible for normal evaluation, regeneration and access to their resources. Distinguishing the two roles is essential: an additional copy increases security, but its usefulness depends on the quality of the material and documentation produced before it was deposited.

ICARDA: when a safety duplicate returned to use

The practical value of this safeguard became clear when war in Syria disrupted the operation of ICARDA’s collection associated with Aleppo. In September 2015, the institution withdrew the first seeds it had previously deposited in Svalbard. The material helped rebuild active collections in Lebanon and Morocco, with further withdrawals in subsequent years. A worldwide catastrophe was not required for a backup to become useful. The inability of one important institution to continue its normal work was sufficient.

Returning seeds did not complete the task. They had to be multiplied, evaluated and brought back into a system that could make them available. This history reveals the difference between a secure package and a functioning agricultural resource. The samples are not a ready-made stock for sowing every field after a crisis, but a starting point for research, breeding and further multiplication. The legacy of Vavilov and later genebanks lies in preserving possibilities: enabling future teams to draw on diversity whose significance the present generation cannot always predict.

Questions and answers

Does Svalbard replace national genebanks?

No. It stores safety duplicates. Active genebanks continue documenting, evaluating, regenerating and providing access to material.

Can every seed be stored for many years in a freezer?

No. Tolerance of drying and low temperatures varies. Some plants require field collections, in vitro culture or specialised cryopreservation.

Are Vavilov’s centres of diversity a precise map of domestication?

No. They represent an important historical research programme that was subsequently developed and revised. High diversity does not always identify a single original domestication site.

Sources

History of agriculture: all topics