Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
05 April 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
WJ swart
Prof Wijnand Swart believes a ‘systems level understanding’ of phytobiomes (consisting of plants, their environment, and all their associated organisms) will enable us to produce sufficient crops to meet global demands while minimising negative impacts on our environment.

Plant health is important for the survival of our planet and all its living creatures. Now, imagine an instrument that contains a DNA chip from virtually every known plant pathogen, where one can simply snip off a piece of the infected plant material, slip it into the ‘plant disease tricorder’, and within seconds you have not only a diagnosis of the disease, but all the information about its control too.

According to Prof Wijnand Swart, Professor of Plant Pathology in the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS) and President of the Southern African Society for Plant Pathology (SASPP), this concept might be a bit far-fetched, but is a distinct possibility for the not-too-distant future. “Without a doubt …,” he believes.

He was recently a guest on a series of radio talks on plant health in South Africa, hosted by the National Science and Technology Forum (NSTF) in partnership with Plaas/Farm TV (YouTube broadcaster). His talk on the topic, Whither (or wither) Plant Pathology in the next 50 years, was specifically focused on understanding the latest research and dynamics of the discipline in a South African context.

In terms of this futuristic perspective, he says collaboration between plant pathologists and biomedical and aeronautical engineers, nanotechnologists, and computer scientists will aid the development of micro-sensory technologies for the detection of new plant diseases that are relevant to biosecurity, plant disease diagnostics, and epidemiological modelling.

In his discussion, Prof Swart referred to the work of Prof John Lucas, former Head of Plant Pathology and Microbiology at the Rothamsted Research Station in the United Kingdom, who believes that there are three key issues facing plant pathologists in the 21st century. These are the strengthening of food security while simultaneously safeguarding the health of associated ecosystems and reducing the dependency on natural resources; the creation of pest and disease control systems that are sustainable and not compromised by the evolution of pest and pathogen strains; and the development of suitable crop protection technologies.

Future technologies

Based on the work of Prof Lucas, Prof Swart states that future technologies in plant health will develop in five areas. In the first area, he says DNA-based technologies will greatly increase the speed, sensitivity, and accuracy of pest and pathogen detection and diagnosis.

Also key here, is the integration of nanomaterials into disease management strategies and diagnostics. He says in the past decade, the use of nanotechnology in phytopathology has grown exponentially. According to him, nanotechnology can increase productivity using nano-pesticides and nano-fertilisers, improve soil quality by means of nano-zeolites and hydrogels, stimulate plant growth using nanomaterials, and provide smart monitoring via nano-sensors and wireless communication devices.

Prof Swart says according to Prof Lucas, the second area in which plant health technologies will grow is plant defence and immunity. When induced, plant resistance primes plants to deal with a diversity of biotic and abiotic stresses. Prospects of inducing chemically modulated plant resistance via biological agents (such as engineered microbes), might result in low-cost seed treatments, thereby removing the need for expensive chemical spray regimes.

Technology development in plant health will also become more evident in genetic diversification. Prof Swart believes sequencing the genomes of major crop species and their wild relatives will expand the known gene pool and diversify genetic resources available to plant breeders.

According to him, a new era is beckoning, where the prospect of crop pharmacology based on signal molecules and their receptors will become a reality. It will be based on the development of novel chemistries designed to manipulate specific molecular targets, by either regulating host resistance or disabling the disease-causing processes of pathogens.

The fifth area in which plant health technologies will develop, is ecological approaches to disease control. He says by understanding the ecology of pathogens, our ability to exploit their natural enemies will improve. Ecological approaches to plant disease control will have a significant impact on the introduction of invasive pathogen species, while the effect of climate change will influence the emergence of new plant diseases and epidemics. He strongly believes that it is important to take a holistic approach to understanding how and why plant pathogenesis occurs if we are to manage diseases effectively.

Future challenges

The development of these new technologies is very important, as there are several challenges that plant pathology will face in the future. These include the increasing demand for food to support the growing global population; the decreasing production potential of agriculture due to competition for fertile land; the increased risk of plant disease epidemics resulting from agricultural intensification; the depletion of natural resources; and the influence of climate change on interactions between plants and their pests or pathogens.

Prof Swart believes a ‘systems level understanding’ of phytobiomes (consisting of plants, their environment, and all their associated organisms) will enable us to produce sufficient crops to meet global demands while minimising negative impacts on our environment.

He concludes, saying that plant pathology will evolve as an interdisciplinary science. He adds that future research will focus on new problems that are traditionally seen as outside the core discipline of plant pathology. Furthermore, food security will be a dominant and important driver of plant pathology research, while the impact of climate change on plant diseases will be very significant. Finally, that the adaptive potential of plant and pathogen populations will be one of the most important predictors of the magnitude of climate change effects.

LISTEN: radio interview


News Archive

Institutional research culture a precondition for research capacity building and excellence
2004-11-16

A lecture presented by Dr. Andrew M. Kaniki at the University of the Free State Recognition Function for research excellence

16 November 2004
The Vice Chancellor, Prof. Frederick Fourie
Deputy Vice Chancellors, Deans
Awardees
Colleagues and ladies and gentlemen

It is a great pleasure to be here at the University of the Free State. I am particularly honoured to have been invited to present this lecture at the First Annual Recognition Function for Research Excellence to honour researchers who have excelled in their respective fields of expertise. I would like to sincerely thank the office of the Director of Research and Development (Professor Swanepol), and in particular Mr. Aldo Stroebel for facilitating the invitation to this celebration.

I would like to congratulate you (the UFS) for institutionalizing “celebration of research excellence”, which as I will argue in this lecture is one of the key characteristics of institutional research culture that supports research capacity building and sustains research excellence.

Allow me to also take this opportunity to congratulate the University of the Free State for clocking 100 years of existence.

Ahmed Bawa and Johan Mouton (2000) in their chapter entitled Research, in the book: Transformation in higher education: global pressures and local realities in South Africa (ed. N. Cloete et. al Pretoria: CHET. 296-333) have argued that “…the sources of productivity and competitiveness [in the knowledge society and global economy] are increasingly dependent on [quality] knowledge and information being applied to productivity”. The quality knowledge they refer to here is research output or research products and the research process, which (research) as defined by the [OECD] Frascati Manual (2002: 30) is:

“…creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications”

The South African Government has set itself the objective of transforming South Africa into a knowledge society that competes effectively in the global system. A knowledge society requires appropriate numbers of educated and skilled people to create quality new knowledge and to translate the knowledge in innovative ways. To this end a number of policies and strategies like the Human Resource Development [HRD] Strategy for South Africa, the National Plan for Higher Education (NPHE) and the South Africa’s Research and Development [R&D] Strategy, have highlighted human resource development and the concomitant scarce skills development as critical for wealth creation in the context of globalization. The key mission of the HRD Strategy for instance is:

To maximize the potential of the people of South Africa, through the acquisition of knowledge and skills, to work productively and competitively in order to achieve a rising quality of life for all, and to set in place an operational plan, together with the necessary institutional arrangements, to achieve this.

The R&D Strategy emphasizes that maximum effort must be exerted to train the necessary numbers of our people in all fields required for development, running and management of modern economies. Higher education institutions like the University of the Free State have a key role to play in this process, because whatever form or shape a university takes, it is expected to conduct research (quality research); teach (quality teaching – and good graduates); and contribute to the development of its community! Thus the NPHE states that the role of higher education in a knowledge-driven world is threefold:

Human resource development;

High-level skills training and

Production, acquisition and application of knowledge.

Quality research output or knowledge which as argued is critical in determining the degree of competitiveness of a country in the knowledge economy is dependent upon quality research (process). Both the process of producing quality research and its utilization cannot and does not happen in a vacuum. It requires an environment that facilitates the production of new knowledge, its utilization and renewal. It requires skilled persons that can produce new knowledge and facilitate the production of new skills for quality knowledge production. Such an environment or in essence a university must have the culture that supports research activity. Institution research culture (that is a conducive and enabling institutional research culture) is a precondition to research capacity building. Without an institutional research culture that facilitates the development and nurturing of new young researchers it is difficult, if not impossible for a university to effectively and efficiently generate new and more quality researchers. Institutional research culture is also necessary to sustain quality research and quality research output or research excellence. It facilitates the development and sustenance of the institutional and people capacities required to do research produce quality research and generally attain research excellence!

We do recognize that the patterns of information and knowledge seeking, and knowledge generation vary among field or disciplines. For example, we know that in the humanities knowledge workers often work individually, and not as collaboratively as do those of the sciences, they all however, require supportive environments – institutional research culture to achieve and sustain research excellence. An institution does not simply attain a supportive research culture, but as Patricia Clements (English Department, University of Alberta, Edmonton) in her presentation Growing a research culture argues, research culture has to be grown [and maintained]. It unifies all natural and engineering scientists; medical researchers, humanists, and social scientists.

I therefore am of the view that Institutional Research Culture is critical to research capacity building and research excellence. I therefore want to spend a few minutes looking at the characteristics of research culture. To be effective, institutional research culture has grown and sustained not only at the institutional level, but also at the faculty, school and departmental levels of any university.

What is Research Culture?

In the process of researching on institutional research culture I identified several characteristics. Many of these overlap in some way. I want to deal with some of these characteristics; some in a little more detail while others simply cursorily. In the process what we should be asking ourselves is the extent to which an institution, like the University of the Free State, and its faculties, individually and severally, is growing and or sustaining this culture.

Institutional Research Strategy: As a plan of action or guide for a course of action, the institutional research strategy must spell out research goals that a university wants to achieve. It must be a prescription of what the university needs to be done with respect to research. As a strategy it is neither an independent activity nor an end in itself, but a component part and operationalization of the university policy or mission. ( Related to this is the Establishment of Institutional research policies)

Includes and makes public the targets, e.g. achieve so many rated scientists and make sure that every year we have so many SAPSE publications. That way people keep an eye on research agendas of the university and nation.

The UFS is obviously on its way, having launched its own Research strategy (A Strategic framework for the development of research at the University of the Free Sate. August 2003). Note that this strategy refers specifically to the “Culture of research” Fig 1

A set of administrative practices to support and encourage research. Patricia Clements (English Department, University of Alberta, Edmonton) in her presentation Growing a research culture argues that that research activity and output within the her Faculty (Arts) were very low and, in spite of the numbers of staff, with no Associate Dean for Research in the Faculty as though they had accepted that research belonged to Medicine and Science and Engineering, and teaching, separated from inquiry, belonged to the Arts. With the change in the thinking about research and development of research culture, it became clear that there was a major role for research support in a faculty her size (now about 360 full time continuing academic staff). The faculty developed a support system for research and began to address the SSHRC issues.

Reduce the bureaucracy system and micromanagement of research! This however, also implies that there is capacity and policies and procedure to manage and guide research processes

Establishment of Intellectual Property regulations and assistance

Research ethics policy and safeguarding by research administration

Focused, applied and suitable nature of the delivery mode (an institution open to new methodologies for conducting research

Programmes suited both full and part-time study particularly at graduate level (Mainly at Faculty/school and department level, and depending on what’s manageable)

Hiring senior academics to engage in, teach on and supervise postgraduate students to facilitate exchange of and transfer ideas and most importantly mentorship especially in view of declining numbers of researchers in particular fields

Quality instruction and facilitation in learning about research processes

A high retention rate of students maintained by the supportive and challenging learning environment and the use of online facilities to support collaboration and in-class learning

Availability of research grants: and awareness of sourcing funds from external sources like the National Research Foundation; Water Research Commission; Medical Research Council, private philanthropies and others outside the country. For example an institution should be able to assess how much of the slice the available funds (NRF etc) its able acquire and possibly top slice from institutional budget.

Adequacy of the financial reward system to encourage university staff members to do research (General Celebration of achievement for research excellence and achievement. This ranges form Annual reports mention; celebratory dinner. At Alberta researchers were given lapels. I don’t know of any academic who do not feel a sense of achievement to get into print or recognised. Access to research facilities within and outside the institution

Provision of infrastructure to support university-based research (e.g. equipment, admin support, etc.) – but also awareness of publicly funded and available research facilities and equipment!

Internet connectivity and changes in the bandwidth of the internet to download articles

Subscription to related bodies by the library so that researcher can download articles

Facilities and resources to attend international conferences to keep one updated

Number of visiting professors/speakers targeting senior scholars and invite them to lunch to ask them to participate and to encourage their best graduate students to do so within the institution and across institutions

Research training seminars for research students including young academics

Participation of staff/students in delivering research papers to national and international conferences

Establishment of research groups to provide interaction frameworks to achieve critical mass of research-active staff

Facilitation for more research time: Targeting new scholars and giving them reduced teaching loads in their first year or two for the purpose of developing their research programs. For the purpose of helping new colleagues to see the shape of South African research support, personalizing it, and creating research community

Take research to the community and argue its necessity, and utility

And, finally celebrating excellence. We must recognize achievement - parties and public recognition for colleagues who achieve splendid things in their research.

In conclusion, I want to reemphasize that research culture has to be grown it does not simply exist in an institution. If it is grown it needs to be nourished, nurtured and sustained. An institution cannot simply leave on borrowed reputation and expect to remain research excellent. It is on this basis that instruments like the National Research Foundation rating system recognizes excellence within a given period of time and not necessarily for a life time! This it is believed encourages continued research excellence.

THANK YOU and best wishes

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept