Auburn Speaks – On Food Systems

Auburn Speaks

On Food Systems

Auburn Speaks

On Food Systems

Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems

CopyrightŠ2014 Auburn University All rights reserved.

Auburn University is a registered trademark.

Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems is a project of Auburn University’s Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development.

Vice President for Research and Economic Development: John Mason, Jr. Editor: Patricia Curtis Managing Editors: Jay Lamar, Jacqueline Kochak Editorial Assistant: Karen Hunley Student Interns: Laurie Nix, Kristina Chesaniuk Art Director: Al Eiland Graphic Designer: Lori Wallace Photographers: Jeffrey Etheridge, Melissa Humble

Sponsoring Offices Office of Program Development, Research Executive Director: Larry Fillmer Business Operations, Marketing, Communications, Public Relations: Leslie Parsons Office of University Writing Director: Margaret Marshall Office of the Provost Director of Special Programs: Jay Lamar Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems is produced in cooperation with the Office of Communications and Marketing.

Project Manager: Lucy LaMar For additional content and information about Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems, visit www.auburn.edu/auburnspeaks.

Auburn University is an equal opportunity employer/educational institution.

Auburn Speaks

On Food Systems Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development

Contents Foreword.................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Preface......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Editor’s note.............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Making Space for Multidisciplinary Research: Auburn University Food Systems Institute and Hubbard Center for Advanced Science, Innovation, and Commerce by Jacqueline Kochak......................................................... 6 Food Security: Conceptualizing Public Policy by Frost Rollins and Kathleen Hale...................................................................... 10 Democratization of the Food System: Interests in a Food Policy Council in Alabama by William C. Thomas, Norbert Wilson, and Michelle R. Worosz......................................................................................................................................... 18 Food Systems and Supply Chains—What’s the Connection?

by Brian Gibson, Joe Hanna, and Mark Clark................................................................................................................................................ 26 Food Defense Begins with Food Intelligence: Planning for Emergencies Is Imperative

by Robert A. Norton............................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 The Chicken Business: The Poultry Industry’s Challenges Are Our Goals by Jacqueline Kochak......................................... 40 Pressure on the Poultry Industry: Putting a Stop to All Antibiotics Is Complicated by Ken Macklin............................... 46 A Model Mill: Improving Feed Quality and Efficiency—and Education by Karen Hunley..................................................... 52

The Scourge of IBV: Developing an Ocular Vaccination Against Avian Coronavirus Infectious Bronchitis Virus by Frederik W. van Ginkel................................................................................................................................................... 54 Protecting Animals and People: New Approach to Low-Cost Vaccinations by Bernhard Kaltenboeck............................. 62 Research Meets Education and Training: The Lambert-Powell Meats Lab by Karen Hunley............................................. 66 Fruits of Labor: Identifying Way to Enhance Fruit Production in the Southeast by Jay Spiers.............................................. 70 Vegetable Trials Guide Alabama Growers by Joe Kemble .................................................................................................................. 78 Growing Practices: Investigating Innovative Fruit Crop Production Systems for Local Markets by Elina D. Coneva and Edgar L. Vinson .................................................................................................................... 80 Pecan Power: Health Benefits, Overseas Demand, Research, and Extension Mean Big Business for Pecans in Alabama by Bill Goff......................................................................................................................................... 86 The Rural Studio Farm: Looking Ahead to Its Roots by Elena Barthel........................................................................................... 92 Auburn Fishes for Challenges: A History of Success by John Jensen .............................................................................................. 98 Meeting Consumer Expectations: Coloration in Catfish Filets by Terry Hanson, David Cline, Corey Courtwright, Yifan Wang, and Shaoyang Liu......................................................................................................... 102 Forty Plus Years With Fish: David Rouse by Karen Hunley............................................................................................................. 108 Oyster Renaissance: Branding Premium Gulf Oysters by Bill Walton and Dan Petrolia........................................................ 110 Oyster Safety for Oyster Fans: AU Lab Works to Keep Producers in Business and Consumers Healthy by Cova Arias with Jacqueline Kochak.................................................................................................................. 114 Simple Taste: Chef Rob McDaniel by Amy Weaver.............................................................................................................................. 120 In Search of the Authentic: O’Neill Keeps Local Flair Alive by Karen Hunley......................................................................... 122 The (Local) Food Network: GIS Project Links Restaurants and Farmers by Stephen Pierce............................................... 126

Perfect Match: Alabama MarketMaker Helps Public Find Just What It Needs by Beth Walton, Deacue Fields, and LaDon Swann.......................................................................................................................................... 130 Collaborating for Success: How Franchising Feeds Restaurant Growth by David J. Ketchen, Jr. ...................................... 134 Collaborating for Safety: Identifying Gaps in Local Food System by Christy Bratcher......................................................... 140 Hunger Solutions Institute: Connecting People and Ideas That Work by Paula Hunker, Harriet Giles, and June Henton......................................................................................................................................................................... 146 We Can’t BBQ Our Way Out of This One: Auburn University Scientists Take the Lead in Managing a Destructive Plague of Wild Pigs by Mark D. Smith and Stephen S. Ditchkoff................................................... 152 Air Pollution: The Effects on Growth and Nutritional Value of Forages by Jacqueline Kochak............................................ 156 Water Management a Top Priority for Alabama Poultry Processing by Joe Hess and Sarge Bilgili............................... 160 Peanuts: Genetic Improvement of Drought Tolerance for Productivity and Food Safety

by Charles Chen, Phat Dang, and Marshall Lamb..................................................................................................................................... 162 Beekeeping in Kenya: Empowering People to Understand, Value, and Protect Their Resources

by William Deutsch and Njogu Kahare.......................................................................................................................................................... 168 Exploring the Federal Road: Historic Road Rich with Stories of Evolving Food Traditions

by Kathryn Braund ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 174 Visualizing Hunger: The Lessons of Käthe Kollwitz by Kathryn M. Floyd ............................................................................... 180 Crossing Borders, Changing Lives: Auburn Engineering Students Help Establish Food Security in Bolivian Village by Karen Hunley.............................................................................................................................................................. 186 Magic City Agriculture Project: Research in Action by Zac Henson........................................................................................... 190 Toni Alexander: Food Allowed in Class by Jay Lamar........................................................................................................................ 196 Tackling Organizational Challenges: Hunger Solutions Institute and United Nations World Food Programme by Daniel Henry and Kate Thornton............................................................................................................ 198 Harberts Bring Storied Quail Hunting Tradition Back to Sedgefields by Leah Rawls Atkins........................................ 204

Deer Lab: Unmatched in Researching White-Tailed Deer Biology and Management

by Stephen S. Ditchkoff and Chad H. Newbolt............................................................................................................................................ 206 Food for the Future: Feeding a Rapidly Growing Population with Fewer Resources

by Keith Cummins................................................................................................................................................................................................ 208 From Canned Food Drives to Cairo: AU Student’s Mission to End Hunger

by Karen Hunley................................................................................................................................................................................................... 214 Creating New Varieties: The Importance of Plant Breeding and Varietal Development

by David B. Weaver.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 218 Good Meat or Bad? Determining Spoilage with Nanostructured Sensor Element

by Jacqueline Kochak........................................................................................................................................................................................... 222 Comprehensive Utilization of Microalgae: Functional Food and Biofuel

by Yifen Wang and Douglas White.................................................................................................................................................................. 226 The Promise of Probiotics: Auburn Lab Seeks to Combat Foodborne Infections by Iryna Sorokulova......................... 234 Detection and Food Safety Center: A Case in Point by Bryan Chin and Karen Hunley........................................................ 238 Learning and Serving: The Outdoor Classroom Project by Sean Forbes, Lisa Kensler, and Brian Parr............................ 240 Food and Health: Perspectives from Nursing by Bonnie Sanderson............................................................................................... 246 Body Quest Food of the Warrior: Combatting Childhood Obesity Through Nutrition Education

by Barb Struempler and Sondra M. Parmer................................................................................................................................................. 250 Healthy Snacking Recommendations: Snacking Benefits for Older Adults by Claire A. Zizza........................................ 259 References.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 264 Bios....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 268

Foreword

Photo by Rebecca Long

Dr. Jay Gogue President of Auburn University “Food is our common ground, a universal experience.” James Beard Welcome to Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems, our annual series highlighting a component of Auburn research that improves our daily lives.

This, our third issue, traces Auburn programs that are creating solutions to today’s complex foodrelated challenges. From developing sustainable fish culture throughout the world, to creating handheld monitors for detecting bacteria on food, to analyzing food-related catastrophes in Africa, Auburn researchers are putting good ideas to work at home and around the world.

The quest for a safe, affordable, sustainable food supply is a common thread that has linked mankind through the ages and continues to link

global populations today. Auburn approaches that quest across a spectrum of disciplines— engineering, economics, marketing, horticulture, poultry science, veterinary medicine, and fisheries, among many others.

Dr. Patricia Curtis is director of the Auburn Food Systems Institute and coordinates campus experts in areas that include safety, nutrition, and access. Highlights of their research activity are chronicled here—research that informs industry, policy and practice, and demonstrates the extent to which Auburn expertise is geographically and topically diverse.

Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems is produced jointly by the Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development, the Office of University Writing, and the Office of the Provost. We’re pleased to share with you the stories and impact of Auburn researchers.

1

Preface

Dr. John M. Mason Jr. Vice President for Research and Economic Development at Auburn University “Imagine all the food mankind has produced over the past 8,000 years. Now consider that we need to produce that same amount again—but in just the next 40 years if we are to feed our growing and hungry world.” –Paul Polman

2

Photo by Jason Adams

Historically, our planet’s rich natural resources have been sufficiently plentiful to support mankind’s needs for water, food, fiber, and energy.

Limited populations with limited demands could, with impunity, use resources in ways that were not particularly efficient and certainly not sustainable, simply because supplies were abundant.

Today, populations are no longer limited. In 2011, world population reached 7 billion people.

By 2050, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that number will exceed 9 billion. Between 2002 and 2008, China alone added the consumer equivalent of Europe to global food demand. The waters, farmlands, and forestlands that once met our food, fiber, and energy needs are no longer available in the seemingly endless supplies that served prior generations.

Here, at Auburn University, and particularly within the Auburn University Food Systems Institute, our researchers are keenly aware that the challenge, going forward, is how to meet the world’s needs for water, food, fiber, and energy in ways that are safe, sustainable, and affordable, while recognizing that: • resources are limited, • food, fiber, and energy production may compete for the same types of resources,

• activity in one sector may result in unintended impacts in another, • investigators should approach these challenges in a systemic and holistic manner.

Experts from across campus draw on Auburn’s long history of engagement in food research to address these critical issues. In fact, food, as a topic, is found in traditional research, creative scholarship, the arts, and the humanities. Activity in these and other areas of inquiry and scholarship serves to provide understanding and solutions to the growing crisis that is the global food supply.

Highlights of Auburn’s activity in these areas are captured here, in Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems.

Produced jointly by the Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development, the Office of University Writing, and the Office of the Provost, the award-winning Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems is an annual publication that shares

images and articles capturing the university’s role in addressing complex issues facing the state, nation, and world.

More than simply an anthology of information about research taken from the news, Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems chronicles the stories behind the headlines and introduces you to Auburn experts and investigators who add to critical stores of knowledge—developing new processes, materials, and technologies along the way. They then take this 3 expertise and focus it on real-world challenges and problems. In putting good ideas to work, Auburn researchers help to ensure that not only food, but water, fiber, and energy supplies are safe, sustainable, and affordable, now and in the decades to come.

Thank you for your interest in our experts and their efforts. To learn more about Auburn University research and to access additional articles about Auburn’s work in the area of food systems, visit us online at www.auburn.edu/research.

Editor’s Note

By Patricia Curtis Director of the Auburn University Food Systems Institute and Professor of Poultry Science

4

Welcome to Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems As a land-grant institution, Auburn University has a long history of doing practical research and communicating the results of that research to the public. Over its 150-plus years, few areas have received more extensive or sustained attention than food. Historically that has included helping farmers grow more abundant crops, sharing techniques for food preparation and preservation with homemakers, and developing feed and vaccines for livestock.

Auburn still does those things, but today they are seen as a few of many interconnected strands in a complex and evolving web. From growing and harvesting to processing and packaging, from transportation to marketing and consumption and disposal, food-related activities form a system.

The establishment in 2013 of the Auburn University Food Systems Institute (AUFSI)

acknowledged the interconnectedness of multiple areas of expertise, research, and extension.

AUFSI provides an infrastructure for promoting interdisciplinary research, outreach, teaching, and training opportunities relating to food systems among faculty in academia, personnel in industry, decision-makers in government, and consumers in the general public. By establishing and maintaining partnerships and working relationships among those involved in the complex system of food production, processing, consumption, and ultimately disposal, AUFSI provides a multiinstitutional collaboration contributing to the circulation of reliable and credible information.

Auburn already boasts one of the strongest aquaculture programs in the world, including work on seafood safety. Auburn also is home to the Detection and Food Safety Center, which is developing innovative new ways to detect foodborne

pathogens and provide technological solutions to ensure food safety.

In the area of poultry and beef safety, AU researchers are developing pathogen-intervention strategies targeting microbial hazards such as Salmonella, and multidisciplinary teams of microbiologists and food animal veterinarians are devising pathogen-reducing interventions in live cattle and chickens.

Auburn’s hotel and restaurant program maintains strong ties with restaurants, hotels and institutions. A restaurant and hotel operated by one of the nation’s premier hotel chains serves as a “lab” for students.

At Auburn, we like to talk about food from “farm to fork” or “pond to plate,” but a food system also includes all of the social, political, economic, and environmental contexts that affect the food supply. What do people like to eat? What should

they be eating? What can we learn from food history? How do citizens go about establishing food policy? And how do we ensure access to food during natural disasters?

You will read about all these issues and more in the following pages. From foodways to food safety to food availability, Auburn Speaks: On Food Systems offers the expertise of Auburn faculty, students, staff, and alums both in this volume and on its website, www.auburn.edu/auburnspeaks, where 5 additional articles, interviews, and profiles can be found. I hope you enjoy them all.

By Jacqueline Kochak

6

Making Space for Research

Auburn University Food Systems Institute and Hubbard Center for Advanced Science, Innovation, and Commerce

I

n the popular imagination, university professors reside in ivory towers, insulated from the world around them. Nothing could be further from the truth at Auburn University, where both the Food Systems Institute and the new Mike Hubbard Center for Advanced Science, Innovation, and Commerce are designed to foster multidisciplinary research while advancing the university’s academic mission and generating economic development in the state.

feeding operations can affect water quality. Use of low doses of antibiotics in food animals increases their nutrient absorption and, thus, production, but raises fears about antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

When contaminated foods cause illness or death, the culprit can be anywhere from the farm to the trucking company to the restaurant where the food was served.

To make the subject even more complicated, there are social factors to consider, like the “food deserts” (usually impoverished areas where it is difficult to buy affordable, nutritious food) that cut across large swaths of Alabama. And, of course, obesity is considered epidemic in the state. The study of obesity can involve nutritionists, kinesiologists, food scientists, and even geographers, since specialists in geographic information systems (GIS) can determine the real availability of food resources in neighborhoods.

Why Is Multidisciplinary Research Important?

A Shared Mission

Research that brings together more than one discipline is important. Today, for example, the food system that reliably supplies safe food to a growing U.S. population is a complex, interrelated web, and no expert in any one area is able to see the whole picture and understand all the factors involved. Climate change will affect growing conditions, for instance, and large, concentrated animal

The mission of the Auburn University Food System Institute (AUFSI) is to bring together scientists from disparate disciplines so they can share their perspectives and explore research opportunities. Because of its shared mission, AUFSI’s offices are in the new Mike Hubbard Center for Advanced Science, Innovation, and Commerce, located in the Auburn Research Park.

7

Researchers from Auburn’s colleges and schools of Agriculture; Engineering; Sciences and Mathematics; Architecture, Design, and Construction; and Forestry and Wildlife Sciences are housed in the $28.8 million center, which opened in September 2013. The Auburn University Board of Trustees voted to name the center after Alabama House Speaker Mike Hubbard, who helped secure $14.1 million in state matching funds to accompany a $14.5 million grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology. Auburn University and the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station provided the remaining support and will fund the operation of 8 the center.

The facility will enhance Auburn’s scientific research not just in food safety and engineering but also in bioenergy, water quality, genomics, information science, and ecosystem health. The building has 20 high-tech laboratories with specialized equipment, a supercomputer, seminar rooms, and outside features such as two five-ton cranes for biofuels work.

The Food Systems Institute, headed by poultry scientist Dr. Pat Curtis, was formed in 2011 and almost immediately received a five-year, $6.5 million grant to create the Virtual Food Systems Training Consortium, a collaboration between Auburn,

Purdue, North Carolina State, and Memphis State.

The consortium creates online training for inspectors of FDA-regulated foods, from the local to the national level.

In addition, AUFSI sponsored the first Food Entrepreneur Conference to provide nuts-and-bolts information for the state’s aspiring food entrepreneurs, and it is bringing together experts across campus to provide ongoing help to businesses through the Food Entrepreneur Initiative. One of AUFSI’s top priorities is bringing together faculty members from a variety of disciplines into working groups that focus on a particular topic.

The Laboratories Among the Hubbard Center’s laboratories are three focused on food safety and traceability, with several others designed for related research. The first laboratory is actually a suite of biosafety level 2 facilities that allows Auburn scientists to research pathogen interventions and work to develop new prevention technologies. In a biosafety level 2 laboratory, personnel must have training specifically in handling pathogenic agents and be directed by scientists with advanced training; access to the laboratory is limited.

The suite, which meets both USDA and FDA processing facility specifications, includes a food

safety cold processing area where the temperature can be lowered to almost freezing. Researchers are able to roll equipment in and out of the area, perhaps working with meat one day and poultry the next. Next door is the preparation area, where foods can be readied for testing using various technologies, from canning to pasteurizing to smoking, to determine how well variations in the methods control pathogens. The area includes a pilot-plantsize retort, essentially a giant pressure cooker for processing canned goods.

On the other side of the cold processing area is the food safety service lab, which is designed for pathogen detection, for researching food quality and standards, and for providing some services to businesses.

FDA-and USDA-approved testing methodologies will be used in the lab in addition to new and innovative rapid detection methods. Traditional methods of detecting foodborne bacteria often rely on time-consuming growth in culture media, followed by isolation, biochemical identification, and sometimes serology. Rapid detection methods make detection and identification of pathogens faster, more convenient, more sensitive, and more specific than conventional assays.

A second lab, not part of the first suite, is to be used for testing and detecting foodborne pathogens

and analyzing food products. The lab will perform standard culturing and analyses of foodborne pathogens, using the same subtyping procedures used by the Centers for Disease Control to track index strains. Biosensors developed by researchers with the AU Detection and Food Safety Center are used to detect pathogens, allergens, and other contaminants in-situ and in real time, which represents a significant step forward as conventional methods of detection involve taking samples back to a lab. Under the leadership of Bryan Chin, the center has built microscale, highly sensitive monitors that detect contamination and identify specific bacteria yet cost just pennies to operate. Multiple biosensors can be used to detect multiple pathogens.

The third lab meets both the engineering and microbial requirements needed to support Auburn’s research into food traceability—the ability to trace the history, application, or location of a food product.

The Hubbard Center also houses the labs of some of AUFSI’s core faculty members. One of these is Dr. Cova Arias, who operates an FDAinspected oyster-testing laboratory that provides inexpensive testing services to oyster processors throughout the Southeast. The lab allows processors to validate and verify their chosen treatment

methods, which are necessary to ensure oysters are free of a potentially dangerous pathogen, V. vulnificus, and safe for consumption. Another is bioengineer Dr. Yifen Wang, whose lab focuses on the applied and fundamental study of biomaterial process engineering, including food engineering.

Cross-Fertilization While the 20 laboratories in the Hubbard Center are arranged in clusters to promote collaboration, the very nature of the center also promotes “cross-fertilization.” As noted, there are also clusters in bioenergy, water quality, genomics, information science, and ecosystem health.

Being at the same site gets scientists from all these disciplines working together. Water research at the facility will explore issues such as water availability, quality, and use—all of which are vital to Alabama’s economic development—but at the same time, scientists researching water issues will be in close proximity to scientists researching food issues such as the effect of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill on the seafood we eat.

Another example is genomics and informatics-based technologies, two recently emerged branches of science that focus on the discovery and utilization of the entire genetic potential of plants, animals, and microorganisms. Technolo-

gies developed at the building could attract new businesses and enterprises to Alabama, creating employment opportunities to foster a sciencebased and technology-driven economy that attracts additional clean and green industry to Alabama. At the same time, genomics could be vital to increasing the world’s food supply enough to feed a world population that is expected to approach 10 billion by the year 2050.

In past centuries, pessimists like Thomas Malthus forecast looming disaster with population increases, but in the 20th century, agricultural research led to the “Green Revolution” and dramatically increased crop yields. Now plant geneticists and crop scientists are concerned about preserving 9 and evaluating genetic resources, which refers to the entire gene pool for a particular species. Farmers only grow the very best varieties, but there are usually many related types, both cultivated and wild, for any given species. By learning about the entire genome, scientists may learn which genes in wild, exotic, or uncultivated species might offer resistance to pests or other plant stresses—information that could be life-saving in the event of widespread drought or other catastrophic stress.

Food Security 10

By Frost Rollins and Kathleen Hale

Conceptualizing Public Policy

A

ccess to healthy food is topic ripe for public policy action. The concept of food security has emerged to shape the conversation amid growing public concern and political attention to the links among food, wellbeing, public health, agriculture, and community sustainability. Food security describes the condition in which individuals have consistent access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life. The idea derives from the related concept of “food desert,” an area in which inhabitants have minimal or no access to healthy food and where health and socioeconomic conditions are linked to limited food choices. Here, we explore the evolution of the idea of food security and the implications of its various meanings for the public policy discussion around access to healthy food. In framing public policy options, the terms that we use to conceptualize and define the problems that demand public attention are always intertwined with our beliefs about those responsible for conditions and with the solu-

tions we determine to be viable. We also discuss approaches to the study of food policy that will help us gain new understanding about the topic; the ways in which we study problems can help us understand our values and beliefs more clearly.

Evolution of a Public Problem The ideas of food security and food deserts share several common themes. The evolution of both concepts suggests that access to healthy food has been threatened by a common group of factors, including industrialized agriculture, an increased concentration of food production in certain areas of the country, and decreasing local food production. Both the idea of food security and a food desert also rely on the underlying concept of access, which includes elements of transportation, proximity, supermarket availability, pricing, and socioeconomic indices of disadvantaged populations. However, food scholars think about the components of food security and food deserts in a

variety of ways and have studied these issues from very different perspectives.

In the United States, the emergence of food deserts in social science literature complemented the appearance of a related term, “food security.”

Food security evolved to describe a rising cluster of concerns beyond simple access to food, such as public health and social equity related to food production and food consumption. The issue of food security has gained substantial American political support; in 2008, the term was incorporated into the U.S. Farm Bill. In Title VI, Section 7527, the bill identifies food deserts as “area[s] in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly…composed of predominantly lower income neighborhoods and communities.” An expansive definition of food security encompasses “a situation in which all community residents obtain a safe, culturally appropriate, nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food system that maximizes community self-

11

reliance and social justice” (Hamm and Bellows 2003). Communities in which these conditions are inhibited are regarded as “food insecure.” Food deserts, then, are widely regarded as the geographic delineator of food-insecure areas.

On the surface it seems reasonable to conclude (and many politicians have concluded) that inhabitants of a food desert experience less food security.

The terms are interrelated, and each references a condition in which there is a lack of food and/or lack of nutrition. However, the terms have not been defined consistently in the studies that examine these conditions, and the overlap between these terms may not be as clear as we have assumed.

Two well-defined themes do appear in these 12 studies: food deserts are physical areas involving measurements of retail access to nutritious food.

The earliest scholarly definitions appeared nearly 15 years ago when the commonly held political definition became formalized: food deserts are “areas of relative exclusion” where residents face “physical and economic barriers to accessing healthy food” (Reisig and Hobbiss 2000). In 2004, scholars begin to expand the definition to add nutrition and retail availability into their descriptions. Here, food deserts are “areas where no food retail outlets exist, or those that do exist are of unacceptable quality. [They] may be characterized

by social deprivation, low incomes and poor levels of nutrition amongst local residents” (Guy and David 2004).

Today, the concept of a food desert consistently involves four elements: 1) a unit of geography, 2) a definition of a sufficiently wide range of nutritious foods, 3) a threshold for determining inadequate access to this range of food from particular retail outlets, and 4) a threshold for determining which populations lack resources to access this range of food from more distant retail outlets.

Each of these elements is open to interpretation, and various interpretations have been used as the number of studies on food deserts has grown (Leete et al. 2012).

Geography has been described through census tracts, neighborhoods, postal codes, and municipal boundaries. Often these geographic units became defined as specific areas that contained only certain socio-demographic characteristics such as low education. The range of nutritious food is commonly reflected by the presence of and variety of food offered within chain supermarkets.

Minimal access to this range of nutritious food is typically reflected by distance measures from grocery stores. Finally, food desert research has assumed that a person’s ability to travel greater distances to obtain this range of nutritious food

will decrease if the individual is poor, unemployed, less educated, or otherwise socioeconomically vulnerable. However, at least one study has found that urban and rural communities may have different interpretations of the meaning of “access” because low-income, urban households were more likely to access food through the redistribution economy (family, friends, and neighbors) than low-income rural households (Apparicio et al.

2007, Larsen and Gilliland 2008, Smoyer-Tomic et al. 2006, Morton et al. 2008). This suggests that the question of access in community food security is about more than transportation or distance from a grocery store.

Very recently the notion of food deserts has expanded to recognize that food insecurity may occur outside food deserts as they have historically been defined. These shifts in definition have reflected changes in thinking about the geography of food deserts, their links to socioeconomic groups, and their links to food provided by traditional large grocery stores. The concepts of “food hinterlands” and “rural food deserts” have emerged to reflect areas that do not reflect the concentrated deprivation identified in other studies but that do have many individuals lacking access to nutritious food (McEntee and Agyeman 2009). Recent research has also identified food

sources other than large retailers that serve as important sources of food for large segments of populations previously identified as living in food deserts. These sources of food include small retailers such as small supermarkets, gas stations, drug stores, and dollar stores; in a study of Dallas, Texas, these smaller retail outlets served as important sources of food for consumers in communities with income and mobility (Regan and Rice 2012). These alternative sources of food also include community-based programs such as urban markets, food pantries, and urban gardens.

Despite these new ways to think about food deserts, our research about food deserts has been hampered by several shortcomings. Studies are conducted within relatively small and distinct geographic units. Some studies are limited to cities and some to counties, while others are conducted at the level of census block or neighborhood.

Even when studies investigate the same area, or are consistent in the way that they define food desert geography, the studies use different core assumptions about why and where food deserts exist. Studies presume that residents of a food desert or food hinterland will experience some sort of negative impact; however, this impact has not been actually identified or measured. At the time of this writing, there is no published research on how

many residents live outside food deserts nationally or how food access may differ for those individuals.

Finally, and perhaps most fundamentally, the main factors considered in all definitions of a food desert—such as access, nutritious food, safe food, and others—are inconsistently defined and measured. These inconsistencies and assumptions open the door to several questions about the current lines of inquiry.

• Is access the same as geographic proximity?

• Is lack of transportation the same as lack of access?

• Does the concept of “safe, nutritious food” always reflect the same assumptions about what food is socially safe and not harmful to our health?

• Are some sources of food such as large, commercial groceries thought to be better or privileged over local gardens, community markets, or bodegas?

How we think about these questions and how we answer them will shape public policy about food. Because of the diverse approaches that have been taken, the results of food desert studies are unable to point consistently toward clear conclusions. We don’t know yet whether food deserts are

always and exclusively associated with a certain socioeconomic profile such as the elderly, the poor, or those with low educational attainment. We are also uncertain about whether food deserts result from an inability to pay for food or an inability to pay for nutritious food. At this point we are also unable to observe patterns among the reasons that people are unable to pay for food and whether the economy contributes to these circumstances through higher food prices or low wages in food deserts, or both. We also do not know how patterns of transportation and location of food outlets have changed over time. In short, although links persist between food deserts and food insecurity, we know little about the systematic connections between 13 these ideas.

Values, Problems, Solutions The range of definitions of food security and food deserts and the wide range of approaches to studying these ideas suggest different values and different definitions of problems. In defining a public problem, we include some ideas and values as “in” and exclude most all other ideas and values as “out.” One consequence of different definitions is that they lead to different understandings of the range of appropriate solutions. Some definitions have high salience, meaning that they make strong

14

emotional connections with the general public or with particular groups. When a policy idea strikes the right note with the public and with politicians, mental images and connections are formed that support particular policy approaches; these ideas or policy labels may be difficult to change later (Stone 2001). Hunger, malnutrition, food deserts, food security, and food justice each conjure up different images; these images suggest ways that we think about responsibility and causation. These images also suggest solutions to the problems that they convey.

An “access” problem, for example, can be defined in terms of individuals and their lack of appropriate transportation; the meaning of “appropriate” could include adjectives such as timely, dependable, affordable, or convenient, to name a few. Access could also be defined in terms of the location of retail food outlets; here, access could mean the lack of outlets in particular areas or the lack of certain kinds of outlets. A definition that focuses on transportation suggests solutions aimed at improving transportation options. A focus on the lack of retail outlets could suggest that responsibility rests with store owners who choose not to locate in particular areas. In a different sort of approach, a problem defined in terms of personal responsibility (for example, “some people prefer

unhealthy food”) will foster solutions aimed at changing personal behavior including exercise and wellness routines. Conditions that involve lack of nutritious food can be defined in many different ways, including “hunger,” “food insecurity,” and even “unhealthy.” Each of these definitions will focus our attention in a different way.

Food policy in the United States has been influenced by research that has generated multiple definitions of food security. By 2000, five years after the term “food deserts” became popular, researchers warned against the use of slippery definitions and reliance on mixed research results (Wrigley 2002). As early as 2001, governmentsponsored research acknowledged the need to “unpack” the metaphor of the food desert. The political apparatus that resulted in the passing of the 2008 Farm Bill also assigned significant weight to the link between food deserts and limited access to large food retailers, and de-emphasized earlier policy language grounded in hunger. This connection was reinforced by countless policy studies and reports generated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and others, which found that food deserts were created primarily by lack of access to large supermarkets and grocery outlets (Ver Ploeg et al. 2009).

The influence of these early ideas and links has fostered new, more expansive definitions of conditions that influence today’s food policy conversation. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations defined “food security” as a condition “when all people, at all times, have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life (FAO 1996). The World Health Organization (WHO) extended the definition to identify three pillars of food security: food availability, food access, and food utilization (WHO 2012). Others incorporate far broader components, as mentioned above, including elements of safety, cultural and community norms, nutrition, sustainability, and social justice. Following passage of the Farm Bill in 2008, the USDA attempted to demystify its definition of food security by breaking it into more concrete community-based goals: • Improve the ability of low-income households and individuals to access adequate amounts of nutritious and culturally appropriate food; • Better the ability of communities to satisfy their own food needs; and • Promote integrative and holistic approaches to issues of local food, agriculture, and nutrition (Andrews 2010).

Different values and goals run through these various public definitions of food deserts and food security (or insecurity). Because public policy decisions are human creations, it is actually not possible to remove values and value judgments from our definitions of public policy problems or from our strategies to resolve them. What is possible is to approach the study of public problems in ways that bring values and goals forward. In this way, we have the opportunity to align multiple values toward a common public purpose. For example, we may find some common values within the ideas of healthy food, access to food, and food that is affordable.

Mapping a Food Security Research Agenda Relatively little research focuses on values that underpin the concepts of food deserts or community food security. And different values come to the forefront of the public conversation over time. In considering only the modern era, hunger has been a common theme in food policy from the time of the Great Depression until the early 21st century.

Today, security is a common theme; perhaps this reflects a heightened national awareness of “security,” in general, since 9/11. These two narratives— hunger and security—can be tied to language

changes in the Farm Bill (2008), the dominant national expression of food policy.

Given these divergent values, how then can we best proceed? New concepts and terminology enter the policy conversation all the time. How can we know which conversation to pursue? Because we are interested in values, much of our research

15

will involve qualitative research approaches uniquely aimed at gathering data about meaning.

Researchers commonly use interviews to collect information about perceptions, beliefs, and values.

Kortright and Wakefield (2011), for example, conducted in-depth interviews with food-growing residents of low- and middle-income neighborhoods in Toronto to explore motivations about growing and sharing food, and perceptions about how those activities affected their health and well-being. Case comparisons use interviews but also add archival document analysis and observation data. In studying food policy, researchers have drawn case comparisons between neighborhoods, organiza16 tions, groups of organizations, and political subdi-

visions. Some cases compare initiatives at a single point in time, or over time, to explore whether new ideas can be replicated or are sustainable. Intensive methods such as focus groups allow reserachers to gather information at the start of a study and use the information they provide as a guide to further inquiry. For instance, a study of the differences between rural and urban patterns of nonmarket food access began with 12 focus groups in three sites in the state of Iowa (Morton et al. 2008). The authors used the results of the focus group data to inform their in-person survey questions as well as help determine the locations and time frames for the rest of their study as it expanded beyond the original sites. Embedded methods of study such

as ethnography allow us to study individuals and organizations in a unique context over time. In one study of large and small community-supported agriculture (CSA) operations in the mid-Atlantic United States, the researcher spent a season on a CSA farm gathering rich data from interviews with farm employees (Lang 2010). These data grew into social histories of CSAs that shed light on how these groups experience organizational rearrangement, shifting goals, changes in power structure, and refinement of their social mission over time.

Understanding Food Policy as a Public Network Problem

Although various qualitative methods give us access to information about values, the methods themselves do not resolve the differences in values that people have related to food security and food deserts. After we have uncovered different values and multiple meanings, we must determine how best to proceed.

Aligning the vastly different values and preferences held by the American public is particularly challenging, and yet this alignment is the heart of the public policy process. The contemporary American public policy environment is comprised of multiple layers of government, multiple government agencies, and systemic interaction with

nonprofit service providers, advocacy groups, and community-based grassroots organizations. At first glance, the diverse collection of actors involved in public policymaking is a chaotic array of government and nonprofit organizations, each in pursuit of a different mission. For example, a local farmer’s market, a sustainable food cooperative, and the USDA appear to have (and may actually pursue) very different objectives. Together, however, they represent different perspectives within a larger public network of communities, individuals, and organizations interested in some aspect of food policy. These networks are notoriously difficult to study in part because of the time involved, the difficulty of identifying network members, and the inherent diversity of mission and purpose of each organization (Agranoff and McGuire 2004).

However, within the differences between these organizations and their values lie seeds of new ideas. The possibilities for sustained policy innovation increase when public networks with divergent opinions are formed (Hale 2011). Identifying members of national and local organizational arrangements (e.g., a previously undefined and unique national nonprofit network) and their formal and informal relationships, missions, and activities can reveal special contributions toward innovative solutions and sustainable reforms that

no single organization could accomplish alone (Hale 2011). Exploratory research to identify the public networks surrounding food security may be useful in discovering similarly innovative solutions. Networks of diverse organizations and values are specially suited to tackle so-called “wicked problems” that arise within complex social systems (Rittel and Webber 1973). These dilemmas are ill-formulated, associated with a high degree of uncertainty and confusing information, and involve multiple decision makers and affected parties. No clear solution exists for such problems; instead, policymakers must choose between competing alternatives, each associated with various costs and benefits and each producing new dilemmas.

Public Policy of Food Security: Moving Ahead Today’s ideas about food security and food deserts represent the early phases of a rapidly evolving public policy issue that has tremendous implications. How we define the conditions that surround and affect us suggests a great deal about the solutions we propose and whether we will be able to reach consensus toward action. On a more fundamental level, our public policy decisions are shaped largely by how we as individuals understand the problems that confront us. Some of the

earliest programs aimed at addressing food security would seem in hindsight to be disjointed or unsystematic; however, methods of inquiry aimed at discovering values and perspectives have been the basis of some early research in this field and could expand research even further.

Understanding food security as a public network issue that blends multiple professional perspectives and the efforts of communities, nonprofits, and public and private agencies may also be a promising approach for bringing multiple viewpoints and values into the policy discussion. The concept of a public network can also extend across disciplines.

Food security is under discussion in a wide variety of fields, including public administration, public 17 policy, political science, agriculture, and geography.

This network could be expanded to incorporate the findings of medical and public health research into our understanding of food security. These fields are positioned to identify the genetic and biochemical elements involved in transporting nutrients from the farm or laboratory to our plates, and eventually to our bodies at the molecular level. Our values will guide us as we define public problems, and public networks can play a role in conceptualizing food policy in ways that align with and reflect those public values.

Democratization of the Food System 18

By William C. Thomas, Norbert Wilson, and Michelle R . Worosz

Interests in a Food Policy Council in Alabama

A

curious truth exits in the South: we are fat and hungry. More properly stated, the prevalence of both obesity and food insecurity are higher in the southern United States, namely Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Alabama, than anywhere else in the country. Alabama ranks fourth in both categories with an 18.2 percent prevalence of food insecurity (Coleman-Jensen et al. 2012) and a 32 percent prevalence of obesity (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2012).

A recent analysis commissioned by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation showed that a 5 percent reduction of average body mass index (BMI), a commonly used metric for obesity, could help reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease and stroke, hypertension, cancer, and arthritis. Without intervention, the estimated rate of obesity in the state is expected to rise to 62.6 percent by 2030.

With intervention, the 5 percent reduction in BMI could lead to a 55.1 percent prevalence of obe-

sity—still high, but less startling than 62.6 percent.

The estimated cumulative health care cost savings of a 5 percent reduction in BMI is $3.381 billion by 2020 and $9.481 billion in 2030 (Levi, Segal, & Salay 2012).

Food Issues in Alabama Currently, the state’s agriculture and food (agrifood) system is not feeding all Alabamians. The top agricultural products by value are, in order, poultry and eggs; cattle and calves; nursery, greenhouse, floriculture, and sod; and other crops and hay (U.S. Department of Agriculture 2009). Many of these products cannot be eaten by people or do not contribute in the form of raw inputs into national and international food systems. In addition, acreage in vegetable production has decreased by more than 29 percent over a 10-year period (U.S. Department of Agriculture 2009).

For some Alabamians, access to food is also a problem. Areas of limited access to supermarkets,

called “food deserts,” span large swaths of the state, especially in the Black Belt and urban centers.

Poverty can also put higher priced fruits and vegetables out of reach of consumers; eight of the 12 counties in the Black Belt have childhood poverty rates of over 40 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2012). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012), 87.1 19 percent of Alabamians indicated they did not eat three or more servings of vegetables a day, and 77.5 percent did not eat two or more servings of fruit a day.

During fall 2011, a broad coalition of Alabama stakeholders began to meet to discuss the state’s agrifood system, its relationship to residents of the state, and opportunities for change. The group decided that Alabama could benefit from a statewide food policy council (FPC). By early 2012, the group developed a steering committee to explore the possibility of developing the Alabama Food Policy Council (AFPC).

What Is a Food Policy Council?

Generally, a food policy council (FPC) is a diverse group of citizens and organizations that seek to educate citizens, identify and address issues related to policy changes, and advocate for policy changes that will improve the agrifood system. According to the Community Food Security Coalition (Sauer 2012), 180 FPCs functioned in the United States in 2012, which represents an 80 percent increase since 2010. Each FPC has a different goal and/or mission, based on the geographic scope of the council and the interest of its members and stakeholders. Of these FPCs, 38 percent have a local focus, 13 percent have a regional focus, and 15 percent have a statewide 20 focus. Many of them have priorities such as policy development and advocacy, enhancing the local food economy, education and outreach, building partnerships with government and farmers, improving public health, and addressing food insecurity.

Currently, three food policy councils exist in Alabama, all having representation on the AFPC Steering Committee. First, the Greater Birmingham—Jefferson Food Policy Council focuses on the issue of food deserts, as well as policies to improve the business climate for the food industry and improve food access. Second, the North Alabama Food Policy Council concentrates on im-

proving communication and collaboration among stakeholders in the agrifood system (producers, processors, retailers/marketers, consumers, etc.).

Third, the River Region Food Policy Council focuses on improving food literacy in Central Alabama by building private–public partnerships among the stakeholders of the agrifood system.

The AFPC steering committee discussed the range of possible organizational structures and focuses modeled by other statewide food policy councils.

Some food policy councils, such as those in North and South Carolina, are extensions of and draw funding from their state’s department of agriculture. Others, such as the Michigan Food Policy Council, focus on building partnerships, especially with schools, and receive funding from private foundations.

Some FPCs, like the Iowa Food Policy Council, are independent nonprofits that receive grants from private foundations and draw dues from its membership. In contrast, the New Mexico Food Policy Council operates as an umbrella nonprofit that serves as a host and convener. Thus, the first goal of the AFPC steering committee was to assess Alabama residents’ willingness to participate in a possible AFPC, what policies an AFPC should pursue, and what resources stakeholders and possible participants in an AFPC might be willing to contribute.

Methods Between September and October 2012, we conducted a written survey and observed participants during a series of listening sessions, which were public gatherings where citizens expressed their opinions of and experiences with the food system in Alabama. The listening sessions were organized and hosted by the members of the steering committee as well as community working partners.

The committee played a critical role in shaping and reviewing the survey used for data collection.

Listening Sessions

One listening session took place in each of the following cities: Atmore, Auburn, Birmingham, Fairfield, Huntsville, Mobile, Montgomery, Rainsville, and Tuscaloosa. Each session was executed somewhat differently and included a different group of stakeholders, reflecting the regional diversity in interest and the ability to attend. The sessions began with the administration of a survey.

After the survey, a steering committee representative moderated a conversation that ranged from 20 to120 minutes according to the parameters defined by our community partners. Some sessions involved panel discussions with local leaders, while others chose an expanded discussion with a broader group of stakeholders.

Survey

The survey included 28 questions aimed at understanding the background, food preferences, attitudes, and policy preferences of respondents.

Respondents were also asked to rank several specific policy options within four policy categories—school food, nutrition/food quality, food security, and local food production—and to rank the policy categories in order of importance. Additionally, respondents were asked if they would be willing to join a hypothetical food policy council by paying annual dues (i.e., $25, $50, $75, $100, $200, or more) and/or volunteering in an advocacy, education, or community organizing capacity.

To determine precisely what type of Alabamian might be interested in food policy and the AFPC, the survey also included questions to determine how respondents defined “local food,” where they believed much of their food was produced, their general attitudes on food insecurity and policy, and basic demographic information such as political leanings and religiosity.

Findings From the nine listening sessions, 228 individuals out of nearly 240 participants completed the survey. Out of our respondents, 65.8 percent are female and 27.6 percent are male. The average age

is 39.6 years old, the average household size is 2.4 persons, and 38.2 percent reported they are married. Our survey respondents are broadly reflective of those interested in a statewide food policy council in Alabama but not necessarily the population at large, as they were predominantly white (76.1 percent), hold advanced degrees (30.7 percent with graduate and/or professional degrees), and are high-income earners (21.9 percent with households incomes of $100,000 or greater).

Issue ranking

Overall, the most important issue category was food insecurity (hunger), with 53.1 percent (121) of respondents indicating it was their top priority issue, followed by nutritional quality, school food, and local food production. For each policy issue, we provided respondents’ policy options or statements. The top policy option associated with each issue category is noted in Table 1.

Perceptions of the Agrifood System

Most respondents (85.1 percent) say they care where their food is produced. However, 29 percent (66 respondents) indicate that they do not know where their food is produced, 11.4 percent claim the food they purchased was produced in the state, 3.5 percent indicated that it was produced within 50 miles of their residence, and 2.2 percent indicate

that it was produced within 25 miles of home.

Of the respondents, 69.3 percent strongly agree that there are people in Alabama who are food insecure (hungry), 44.7 percent indicate that they strongly agree that state policies are needed to reduce food insecurity, and 46.5 percent strongly agree that they would be willing to support a policy that reduces food insecurity.

In the survey, we asked respondents to comment on their religious views, as religious views may influence perceptions of challenges and solutions.

Those who say religion is an important part of their daily life are more likely to indicate that food security was their top-ranked issue than those who indicated religion is not an important part of their 21 daily life.

Dues and Volunteering

Of respondents, 63.2 percent (144) said they would be willing to pay annual dues to join the AFPC; on average, respondents were willing to pay $42.92. On average, respondents also indicated they are willing to volunteer 3.86 hours a month, depending on the activity. When asked what kind of volunteer activity they would be most comfortable with, 37.7 percent said they would attend monthly organizing meetings, 24.1 percent would meet with elected officials, and 19.7 percent

Table 1. Top-ranked policy statements by issue

Economic Development

Issue Category

Top-Ranked Policy Statement

First-Place Votes in Issue Category

Food Insecurity

State and local governments should work with food banks, food pantries, and other charitable organizations, including faith-based groups, to increase and improve programs that reduce food insecurity.

43.4% (99)

Nutritional Quality

Communities should consider setting aside public property and creating zoning for community gardens and neighborhood farms in development plans.

31.1% (71)

School Food

Local, state, and federal governments should encourage school nutrition directors to buy from local farmers when possible.

39.0% (89)

Local Food

State and local policies should encourage local food production and processing as a means of job creation.

27.2% (62)

22

would host a meeting about food policy in their community.

We assert that religious beliefs influence how people respond to the “willingness to pay” question. While the majority of those indicating that religion is important are also willing to pay dues to an AFPC, those who say religion is not important are more likely to indicate a willingness to pay dues to such an organization. A noticeable

difference exists in how people respond to the “willingness to pay” questions based on political standing. Of those who consider themselves to be liberal or very liberal, 86 percent responded they would be willing to pay to join a statewide food policy council, as opposed to the 61.4 percent who consider themselves moderates and 55.4 percent who consider themselves conservative or very conservative.

In a different line of questioning, we asked respondents about their impression of local food production as an engine for economic growth.

Over 67 percent of respondents agree/strongly agree that food production is good for local economic development. Of respondents, 49.1 percent strongly agree that they would support a program that increases local food production as a means of improving local economic development.

Because policies associated with economic development are politically charged, we asked respondents about their political leanings. Although political affiliations made no appreciable differences in the way respondents ranked the importance of local food, a clear breakdown can be seen among the policy statements within the local food category. We can see that moderates tend to favor local food as a way to create jobs locally, while those who describe themselves as more liberal respond to the idea of sustainable agriculture, and conservatives are more interested in the use of grants and tax incentives to improve the local agrifood system.

Demographic Limitations

While we believe that the listening sessions were successful at engaging groups that are already

concerned about the agrifood system in Alabama, the sample of respondents is not reflective of the state’s population as a whole. Our sample reflects Alabamians who have expressed interested in the agrifood system by their participation in the listening sessions. When comparing the demographics of our sample of survey respondents to those listed for Alabama by the 2011 American Community Survey, it is easy to conclude that our sample is heavily biased towards females, younger individuals, employed individuals with relatively high household incomes, and those who have higher levels of educational attainment than Alabama’s population as a whole. It is also worth noting that every racial demographic is under-sampled, with the exception of Whites and American Indians.

Politically, the respondents were split fairly evenly—25 percent indicated they are conservative or very conservative, 25 percent liberal or very liberal, and 37.8 percent moderate. However, when compared to the state demographics, the survey was biased towards moderates and liberals.

Moreover, our survey sample is slightly less religious than the state of Alabama as a whole.

Most of our respondents indicated that they are religious, with 47.8 percent saying religion is an important part of their daily life, and 50.4

percent indicating their religious beliefs are “very important” to them. While 50.4 percent of our respondents indicated they were “very religious,” 74 percent of Alabamians responded in the same way, according to a 2009 report by The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

Listening session responses

Participants in the listening sessions highlighted two main themes—collaboration and incentives.

Participants emphasized the need for the members of the AFPC Steering Committee to collaborate with one another, the private sector, and government to improve policies that affect the food system. Additionally, participants indicated that the AFPC would need to focus on collaborating with government agencies (such as the USDA) to provide resources to farmers and members. In terms of incentives, participants indicated that incentives were needed to attract new and beginning farmers, for supporting existing farms, for younger farmers, for schools to buy local, and for producers to produce for schools. They also indicated that incentives were needed to do things such as give away produce by gleaning or tax incentives. Many participants indicated they did not believe change in the food system could happen unless there were proper incentives.

Many participants discussed the need to improve food access. While some participants, particularly in Birmingham, highlighted the need to address food deserts, others said they thought that approaches such as increasing the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formally food stamps) participation and acceptance are important. Participants indicated the need for educational programs, both for policymakers and citizens, and said that when approaching policymakers, specific recommendations needed to be made.

In terms of regulation, many participants in the listening sessions said food safety was important, but participants understood that some regulations make it more difficult for smaller produc23 ers to compete in the market. Particularly at the Mobile listening session, participants discussed local regulations that prevented some restaurants, grocery stores, and farmers from donating to the local food bank.

Discussion and Conclusion Through the survey, we found some direction for the AFPC. The respondents are interested in food security (hunger) issues. Consistent with this finding, Lt. Gov. Kay Ivey and Auburn University launched the “Ending Child Hunger in Alabama” campaign in April 2013. In an online survey that

extends the current data, hunger remained the number-one issue for the state, which provides further evidence of the significance of hunger to Alabamians. Additionally, nearly 70 percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that hunger is a problem in the state. These findings suggest that many of our respondents are highly aware of the issue of food insecurity and see it as very important.

While hunger was noted as the most important food policy issue, religiously oriented respondents were more likely to choose hunger as the numberone food policy issue relative to less religious respondents. Therefore, efforts to address hunger may benefit from collaboration with religious com24 munities around the state. In contrast, the less religious and the politically liberal were willing to pay more to support the work of a food policy council.

This could be because those who are religious may already donate to a religious organization that they see as addressing hunger issues. Additionally, this finding may reflect the conflicting political views of the role of government and, by extension, the influence of groups on government regarding certain policy issues.

Hunger ranked above the idea of using food production as an engine of economic development. This result may indicate that while economic development was not as important to individuals

in the ranking exercise, they do believe that local food production could be a means to improve economic development. We found that polticial identification influenced how respondents reacted to questions about the role of local foods in economic development. These results suggest the importance of appropriate messaging and the need to build broad policital support to move food policy issues forward.

Epilogue At the Alabama Sustainable Agriculture Network (ASAN) Food and Farm Forum, held in Orange Beach, Alabama, on October 26-27, 2012, the AFPC steering committee reconvened to discuss the results of the surveys and listening sessions, as well as to discuss the possible structure for the organization.

After reviewing information from the surveys, as well as the experiences of other local and state food policy councils, the steering committee decided it would be best to move forward with a food policy council that, at least initially, served as a major program of a nonprofit, with ASAN agreeing to house the AFPC. Some members emphasized an opportunity to work with the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries. While this strategic opportunity

was important, steering committee members were reluctant to adopt a structure similar to those of North and South Carolina’s councils because of potential problems with political and administrative instability.

Some of the steering committee members emphasized the need to continue listening sessions throughout the course of the food policy council’s life to work toward democratizing Alabama’s local food system. Many members were excited at the prospect of having more listening sessions in their respective areas and reaching out to new individuals and groups. These listening sessions could also help develop messaging and create positive public opinion for possible policy changes. Steering committee members discussed the need to continue the conversation, particularly in regards to procuring funds for programs and staff, hiring criteria for staff, and keeping in mind the necessary strategic partnerships to implement policy changes.

The steering committee agreed to reconvene in late 2012 or early 2013 to plan for the future.

The committee still meets and is moving forward with efforts to formalize the Alabama Food Policy Council. For more information about the AFPC, contact Norbert Wilson (Norbert.Wilson@auburn.edu) or the Alabama Sustainable Agriculture Network (http://asanonline.org/).

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

M

ichelle Worosz and Norbert Wilson are faculty in Auburn’s Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. They collaborated with recent MA graduate William Thomas on this article.

25

26

Food Systems and Supply Chains

By Brian Gibson, Joe Hanna, and Mark Clark

What’s the Connection?

A

quick scan of major news headlines reveals numerous articles detailing food-related safety concerns. Articles about illnesses and death related to tainted spinach, green onions, cantaloupe, and peanut butter are just a few of the highly publicized recent food supply problems.

These instances have raised public concerns about food safety and have prompted numerous calls for action to help prevent or minimize the impact of these occurrences in the future.

In a 2011 report, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that in the United States, contaminated food had caused approximately 1,000 disease outbreaks—and that is only illnesses that were reported. The report went on to identify 31 known pathogens responsible for an alarming 9.4 million foodborne illness instances. Contaminated food was responsible for approximately 55,961 hospitalizations and 1,351 deaths (Scallan et al. 2011). Cost estimates attributed to these foodborne illnesses and deaths are

staggering, and the illnesses and deaths themselves have a profound and negative impact on people’s lives as well as on our economy.

Supply chain management (SCM) activities can have a tremendous impact on our food supply. From the time a product is manufactured or harvested until a consumer purchases the product, supply chain activities impact our food products.

The safe and effective delivery of food from the farm to your fork is a complicated challenge that calls for effective management practices throughout the entire food supply chain. As with any complex supply chain, food-related processing and distribution systems create exceptional challenges for those entrusted with the safety and security of our food supply.

Food safety focuses on preventing tainted food.

This is accomplished through proper growing, harvesting, packaging, shipping, handling, and food preparation practices. When contamination does occur, the goal is to minimize its impact on the

population. In these cases, traceability is one vital intervention component to a swift and effective supply chain response. Traceability is the ability to follow the movement of a food product through the stages of production, processing, and distribution. Effective traceability is achieved by being able to accurately and quickly track the history of the food product’s movement through the entire 27 supply chain.

Both food safety and food traceability impact public health. While food safety is largely recognized as a collection of best management and production practices designed to prevent foodborne illnesses, food traceability is predominantly reactive.

Traceability typically encompasses a set of measures designed to quickly find and remove the source of the foodborne illness from the marketplace. While a well-designed food supply chain must incorporate the elements of both food safety and product traceability to be considered effective, this article focuses primarily on traceability initiatives.

Why Trace Food from Farm to Fork?

Supply chain management plays a critical role in traceability and regulatory compliance. Tracing 28 a food product or products through the supply chain requires a trail (or series) of transactions that can be logically followed. Documents required for the transportation and distribution of food products—bills of lading, purchase orders, packing slips, and other related documents—provide an invaluable paper trail of the flow of goods through the supply chain.

When re-creating the path of the food, the current policy for traceability requires each entity along the supply chain to maintain records on where the product came from and where the product was shipped. Done properly, information from this “one-up-one-back policy” can be combined to

effectively trace a food product from the retail shelf back to the farm or from the farm forward to the retail shelf (Levinson 2009). However, non-standardized practices and varying levels of commitment to the process have many asking if this policy is sufficient.

While the “one-up-one-back policy” is required, many organizations of a food supply chain network are responding to customer concerns and the potential for increased government regulation by going beyond minimum requirements. Many companies have undertaken an aggressive expansion of their traceability programs to include the entire food supply chain. This initiative, known by many as “whole chain” traceability, should provide greater product flow visibility, control, and responsiveness when unforeseen events occur.

Companies pursuing whole-chain traceability cite enhanced public trust, the attraction and retention of customers, improved operational efficiency, and minimizing the negative impact of tainted food in the marketplace as key drivers in the decision to pursue the strategy.

While food of any kind can be tainted, let’s look at a popular food item: pizza. Fresh or frozen pizza is readily available through both retail and food service outlets. Pizza typically has many different ingredients, including herbs and spices, flour, tomato sauce, cheese, and a variety of topping choices such as mushrooms and green peppers.

Many of the pizza ingredients are either fresh produce items (such as various toppings) or include fresh produce in the recipe (such as tomatoes in tomato sauce).

Customers relying on the supply chain for pizza demand a fresh and high-quality product.

Unfortunately, many of the produce items included in pizza experience their peak of freshness at the time of harvest. To meet the high expectations of today’s customers, supply chain managers must understand the characteristics of each commodity they handle and strive to maximize its integrity.

This means maintaining the cold chain, controlling humidity, satisfying ventilation issues, and avoiding idle time in uncontrolled environments such

as receiving docks. In addition, prompt delivery, high-quality packaging, and a smooth ride also help preserve produce quality.

Food Tracing Complexities: An Example Clearly, there are many complexities and challenges associated with maintaining the integrity of fresh produce throughout the supply chain.

Couple supply chain complexities with the fact that humans will be ingesting the food products, and the risk of failing to maintain sufficient product integrity quickly becomes noteworthy. As a result, product traceability capabilities are vitally important to the industry.

The fresh produce industry continues to grow in both size and variety and is becoming much more global. In 2003, Dimitri published results showing that the variety of fresh produce items in retail stores roughly doubled during the 10 years her study covered. Furthermore, per capita consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables increased an average of 6 percent per year during the same 10-year period.

McLaughlin (1999), Golan et al. (2004), and Porter (2011) all examined similar aspects of the food industry in their research. McLaughlin reported that of the $75 billion fresh fruits and

vegetables consumed, roughly $40 billion was purchased at retail grocery stores while about $34 billion was provided through food service organizations. Golan et al. reported similar results that show consumption from the food service and retail industries nearly split at 50 percent for each. Porter reported slightly different percentages, with 32 percent of produce consumption passing through the food service industry and about 66 percent being sold through retailers.

The size and pace of growth for the fresh produce industry may vary slightly by region or study, but the upward trend is undeniable. Study results about where consumers are acquiring their fruits and vegetables may also vary, but it is clear that

both retail outlets and food service providers play key roles in bringing fresh produce to the consumer. In fact, people are acquiring and consuming tremendous quantities and varieties of fresh produce from a diverse set of global suppliers. The diagram illustrates a “typical� produce supply chain. Figure 1 helps to illustrate some of the challenges associated with the fresh produce supply process.

The diagram illustrates some of the potential complexities associated with tracing product through a fresh produce supply chain. Keep in mind this is a diagram of the food supply chain for just one fresh produce item—and your pizza may have dozens of different ingredients, each traveling through its own unique chain. It is easy to see how tracking each pizza ingredient from the farm to the fork rapidly becomes a complex and challenging proposition.

In addition to the many players involved in the farm-to-fork supply chain, these types of products are highly perishable and very temperature-sensitive. Furthermore, many of the packaging methods currently used in the fresh produce industry (for example, bulk cases, bins, mesh bags, etc.) do not facilitate the adoption of information technology that could significantly enhance the effectiveness and timeliness of product traceability. Not only are packaging and product sensitivity critical issues,

29

Figure 1: Produce Supply Chain (Adapted from Golan et al. (2004) and McLaughlin (1999))

30

but a tremendous amount of product transformation and commingling takes place as these products navigate their way through the supply chain network.

Tomatoes from multiple farms may commingle as they make the journey through the food supply chain and eventually become a key ingredient in the tomato sauce on your pizza. How do you separate the commingled tomatoes in your tomato sauce and trace them backward through the supply chain to the original field where they were grown?

All these issues combine to create challenges that can limit the ability to effectively isolate the individual product that might be the culprit of a foodborne illness.

Nevertheless, customers continue to demand an increasingly wide variety of high-quality food items. Therefore, it is incumbent upon those involved in the food supply chain to be able to respond to customer expectations, comply with government regulations, and retain public confidence in the process. This requires the establishment of greater supply chain collaboration and standardization to support whole chain traceability initiatives.

Done successfully, this allows the product to be successfully tracked as it moves from the growing fields to the retail shelves.

Traceability Initiatives The Fresh Produce Traceability Guide to Implementation, prepared by the Produce Marketing Association (PMA) and the Canadian Produce Marketing Association (CPMA), further highlights the importance of traceability. The guide states that traceability offers real potential for adding value to the way business is conducted across the entire supply chain. Some of the benefits generated by a strong traceability system include: • Market benefits: The ability to promptly identify and efficiently recall a potentially unsafe product, bolstering consumer confidence in the produce industry • Process improvement benefits: Stronger grower-to-retailer feedback loops and greater trading partner collaboration, enhancing product quality, condition, and delivery, as well as supply chain efficiencies • Compliance benefits: Working within the regulatory framework to support safety legislation and address product tampering and agroterrorism concerns.

Because of continued, significant demand for fresh produce and the desire to eliminate or dramatically reduce the impact of any foodborne

illness issues, the Produce Traceability Initiative (PTI) has also become popular. The PTI is a voluntary, industry-wide effort designed to help practitioners maximize the effectiveness of current food tracing procedures. An industry-led initiative, PTI is governed by a 34-member leadership council. The goal is to proactively assist the produce industry in maximizing the effectiveness of current tracing procedures while developing a standardized industry approach to enhance the speed and efficiency of traceability systems for the future.

A visit to the Product Traceability Initiative website (www.producttraceability.org) quickly reveals that information technology is essential to traceability. At the top of the homepage, the PTI vision statement boldly declares, “Supply chain-wide adoption of electronic traceability.”

Successful implementation of the PTI requires data synchronization, information capture and storage, barcodes, and other technology-related elements. As a result, technology has become a key element of achieving whole-chain traceability of fresh produce.

Importance of Information on Tracing While “whole chain” traceability holds considerable promise for enhancing customer value and boosting revenues, the sophistication of whole-chain

traceability is difficult to achieve via paper-based processes. Information technology can help to provide an effective response to this challenge.

Implementation of new technologies, however, does not guarantee success.

Oftentimes, organizations view technology as the stand-alone solution to their traceability needs.

Technology is a wonderful facilitating tool for traceability, but it cannot overcome incomplete or lowquality data, improve poorly designed processes, or overcome unrealistic expectations. Therefore, before an organization can begin to investigate information technology-based solutions, it is important to lay a foundation for success.

Companies serious about whole-chain traceability 31 must first commit to traceability data standards. Of course, not all organizations have the time, resources, and inclination to develop independent traceability programs complete with intricate data collection and analysis capabilities. As previously illustrated, produce trade associations and working groups have focused tirelessly on a variety of traceability issues to assist with traceability enhancement.

One focus area of these industry-driven initiatives has been on data capture and evaluation.

Every case of fresh produce is required to display at least three crucial pieces of data:

• A global trade item number (GTIN), which identifies the “manufacturer” or brand owner and the type of product inside that case; • A lot number specifically identifying the lot from which the produce came; and • The produce harvest or pack date if it is not already incorporated in the lot number.

One popular data-oriented standard, which has been adopted by many, was developed by Can-Trace, Canada’s traceability initiative. The Can-Trace standard actually mandates twelve data elements for basic traceability and nine optional elements for enhanced traceability capabilities.

32 These standards outline requirements to be used in the supply chain for one-up-one-down traceability.

The initiative involves collecting, keeping, and sharing both mandatory traceability data elements (such as sender identifier, lot number, product description, etc.) and preferably additional data elements (such as pack date, logistics provider identifier, country of origin, etc.). The Can-Trace standards are fully aligned with popular and wellrecognized industry standards such as GS1 global standards, European Union regulations, and U.S. Bioterrorism Act requirements. One key to these types of data and traceability initiatives is to shift

from proprietary identification numbers to standard format information that is meaningful and readily usable by other trading partners operating in the supply chain network.

While dedication to data standards and accessibility is important, an overall commitment to continuous process improvement is also required. Organizations often fail to change their supply chain processes to take full advantage of new initiatives and technologies that may be beneficial. The key is to make concurrent, coordinated changes throughout the organization and, when possible, coordinate with other trading partners serving the same supply chain network.

To help facilitate continuous process improvement, the Canadian Produce Marketing

Association (CPMA) and the Produce Marketing Association (PMA) recently collaborated to form a task force to review industry best practices.

The CPMA/PMA task force built upon the work of Can-Trace and incorporated results from traceability pilot studies to create a guide that helps to ensure consistency and harmony of practices across the industry. A key focus area of the task force report is on establishing effective implementation processes and best practices for traceability systems.

For those organizations serious about wholechain traceability initiatives, the CPMA/PMA Traceability Task Force’s Best Practices Report recommends establishing a traceability project team.

The team is charged with conducting a gap analysis of existing practices, analyzing the business case for enhanced traceability, and creating a strategic plan and migration path for adoption. While the report does not advocate a single implementation approach, it provides readers with many useful insights for how to improve both paper-based and technology-based traceability systems.

While industry trade association sources can be helpful, the organization must have sufficient capabilities to collect and access the data necessary for achieving traceability. Typically, this requires a technology application, and evaluating the various

technology options can be time-consuming and confusing. Comparing tools and their promised capabilities can lead to “paralysis by analysis” and prevent a decision to proceed with a needed technology adoption. It is important to note that even with the correct data available and processes in place, it is unlikely that a single technology solution is available that achieves the end-to-end traceability and information-generating capabilities desired by everyone in the organization. Therefore, it is important to retain sight of your original traceability goals when evaluating the various technologybased solutions available.

While there are several key issues associated with information technology involved in the traceability of produce or food, perhaps the most widely discussed aspect of traceability technology deals with the data-acquisition phase. It is critical to efficiently assemble accurate and standardized data that makes sense across the entire supply chain.

Synchronization of the supply chain and rapid information retrieval are highly dependent upon the use of harmonized information.

The data acquisition debate centers on whether to use barcodes or radio frequency identification (RFID). Both capture data far more quickly and accurately than manual processes. Although they require human intervention to scan information,

UPC barcodes have been used successfully in the consumer packaged goods industry for decades.

They are cost-effective, the technology is proven, and the retail infrastructure of barcode readers and databases already exists (Gibson 2007).

Like barcoding, RFID is an automatic identification method. Unique product identification information similar to a serial number is stored on an RFID tag. Each tag is read when it passes within proximity of an RFID reader, and these tags contain unique identifiers not found on traditional barcodes. Research has shown that technology-based applications like RFID have considerable promise to significantly enhance inventory management and traceability of food items in a cost-effective fashion (Karkkainen 2003 and Mai et al. 2010).

Whether data is captured with the use of a barcode or an RFID tag, the information must be common and accessible across the entire supply chain. Collecting common, meaningful, and readily accessible data in a database allows for efficient storage of traceability data elements and supports the timely retrieval of records for transaction analysis and tracking. The proper data-capture techniques support the fast retrieval and dissemination of information that is so critical in the event of a product recall.

Conclusion It is no longer acceptable for the food supply chain system to take days or weeks to fully trace food products back to their source. Fortunately, through technology-driven traceability initiatives, information query, retrieval, and publication can now be achieved in hours or even minutes. While the technology provides the advantage of greatly enhanced speed of information, the clarity and richness of the information is also far superior to the older, paper-based processes of the past.

Despite its confusing options, cost, and challenges, significant benefits await organizations that adopt traceability technology. These types of tools help alleviate problems encountered in past 33 product-quality situations—the slow response and inability to pinpoint problem sources, which lead to widespread recalls and damaging publicity that negatively impacts company sales and, in some cases, human life. As the food industry progresses from reactive manual traceability processes that require “needle in the haystack” data searches to proactive, technology-based whole-chain traceability processes, many benefits will result. Ultimately, the broad adoption of these types of initiatives will enhance food product safety and quality, bolster product brand protection, and improve overall supply chain-wide control and performance.

Food Defense Begins with Food Intelligence 34

By Robert A. Norton

Planning for Emergencies Is Imperative

T

here was a time when the United States produced most of its own food. Food in those days was readily available but limited in its variety, and many types of food were seasonal. Much has changed with the development of more efficient agricultural methods, better storage, and transportation systems.

Today, the U.S. arguably boasts the safest and most economical food production and most sophisticated distribution system in the world. America’s palate for the new and different continues to expand so that once exotic or even unknown foods have become commonplace. These changes, however, have been accompanied by a dramatic shift in demographics.

Consumers of today have largely lost an understanding of the traditional sources of food (such as farms, fields, ranches, and orchards) and now tend to think of food’s origin as the grocery store or the fast-food restaurant. America has moved so far away from its agrarian past that most people can-

not produce for themselves even the most simply grown foods.

Because people are so far away from the food’s source (in some cases, continents away), they know little about the processes involved in manufacturing food and almost completely lack an understanding of the complicated transportation and distribution systems that seemingly never fail to fill the shelves with good things to eat. Some say ignorance is bliss, but with ignorance also comes vulnerability.

Consumers need to understand the complexities of modern food production so they can prepare for disruptions caused by natural disasters or terrorist attacks. This can be accomplished in part by better understanding how food corporations plan for contingencies and then applying those lessons at the household level.

For the moment, think about food in a different way. The average large city in the United States contains about three days’ supply of food. Should the supply chain be disrupted, a readily available alterna-

tive supply might not exist. Some people think the government would step in to provide necessities in an emergency, but countless cases—including the most recent disasters caused by tornadoes in the Oklahoma City region—have proven that the government is only marginally effective in providing even short-term solutions. Like companies, individuals should always consider food disruption 35 as a distinct possibility when an emergency looms.

This kind of disruption becomes even more likely as the magnitude of the disaster increases.

Some of the East Coast supermarkets and restaurants destroyed by Hurricane Sandy are only slowly being rebuilt, while others will never return, making food less conveniently available. That might not seem dire, since one might argue that people can travel to undamaged retailers nearby.

But what about those who can’t easily travel, such as those who lost their homes and vehicles, or those who do not have the economic ability to replace one source of food with another?

After the Oklahoma tornadoes and Hurricane Sandy, some people actually did go hungry, some for several days, because no one could get through the debris to offer assistance. This is one reason the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recommends that all households store at least a three-day supply of nonperishable food. Many people ignore this recommendation, while others plan for only very short disruptions. In the case of Moore, Oklahoma, it actually took days and in some cases more than a week for heavy equipment to clear a path to some neighborhoods.

Help eventually arrived, but not before many survivors learned what real hunger and thirst 36 were like. Unfortunately, after both the Moore tornadoes and Hurricane Sandy, even people who pre-planned for emergencies by wisely storing food and water were adversely affected when the food and water supplies were blown or washed away with their homes. Relief supplies were slow in coming because of the magnitude of the damage and debris, but also because of the usual bureaucratic hiccups associated with any emergency response.

Know Your Needs The average food product—say, a can of chicken soup or a soft drink—contains a wide variety of ingredients, some from places outside the United

States. Consumers expect and demand consistency (taste and availability, for example) in the products they purchase, and every can of “Burpo Cola” is supposed to taste like the last.

One large beverage corporation learned firsthand the full measure of potential consumer wrath when a time-tested formula was changed in the mid-1980s, forcing the corporation to eventually return to the original formula. Observers still debate whether the change and subsequent controversy were all part of a clever marketing ploy, but the lesson stuck with corporations. They learned that consumers vote with their feet by moving away from products that change dramatically. Consistency is a

business necessity. By design, therefore, the taste of “Aunt Ellie’s Famous Chicken Pot Pies” never varies.

“New and improved” often means little beyond the cosmetic—the size of the serving or the packaging might change, but not the taste.

Imagine the effect on sales and consumption if the flavor of a familiar canned, frozen, or boxed product changed depending on the time of year, with the buyer never knowing what to expect.

Imagine the ensuing corporate panic if a key ingredient, an ingredient responsible for much of the product’s distinctive taste, were suddenly unavailable because of a natural disaster, social instability, or war.

Supply Chain Unlike private individuals and governments, food corporations—like other businesses—live in a constant state of competition. For that reason, they plan for contingencies so alternate sources of ingredients can be quickly moved into place should the normal supply be disrupted. In other words, corporations have to plan so that their supply chains become virtually uninterruptable.

How do food corporations protect themselves?

Like other businesses, they follow four basic steps. First, they know their own business and its products, and second they assess their risks.

Third, they formulate a plan, and—perhaps most important—they test the plan. Of the four steps, the easiest would seem to be the first, but in fact, knowing the business is not so simple.

Food corporations are large, complex operations where ingredients and supplies (spices and other ingredients, and containers, to name a few) come from multiple directions, while finished food stuffs go out to many distribution points where the consumer first comes into contact with the product.

Remember, a given food corporation may produce hundreds of products. Each “input” has to have redundancy so that each “output”

can be made to happen under virtually any circumstances. Emergencies can’t stop the peanut butter—imagine trying to make it without the peanuts. Alternate sources of ingredients have to be available, and systems must be in place so that a substitute ingredient is available when the original is not. In terms of corporate needs, the alternate ingredient also has to have the same characteristics as the original, so when it is combined with other ingredients the resulting food product tastes the same as always.

Know Your Threats Businesses have to know what is happening in the world to properly assess the many and varied risks. Most people would be surprised to know that businesses gather intelligence for the same reason as the government and the military gather intelligence—for protection. Companies have to protect their assets so they can remain in business.

Think again about the issue of ingredients. Suppose a key ingredient, the thing that makes Burpo Cola so distinct, is only available from a part of the world that is politically unstable. How can a corporation plan for continued operations if executives lack knowledge about the country or region where key ingredients originate?

Know Your Response Plan Formulating a properly functioning response plan is essential in developing the contingencies that keep businesses running. Alternate routes and methods assure the continuance of the business.

Often, food manufacturers produce products under many labels, meaning “name brands,” store brands, and generic food products often come from the same factories. Each is formulated separately and distinctly, and each is sized according to predetermined specifications and packaged uniquely.

Some or all may require the same ingredients, so that continued ingredient availability becomes critical across the entire business portfolio. Op37 tions for substitutions must be researched and tested, and alternative logistical arrangements have to be arranged, all at minimal costs, to maintain profitability. Testing has to reach across the entire business enterprise to ensure continuity. Bad plans cause failures that might damage the company— whether by impacting profits and assets (buildings, people, or brand name, for instance), or worse yet, by destroying the company.

Creating Better Food Security Think of your family as a corporation, in this case a food corporation. Your family needs to eat. There

are inputs (food and water) and things that support that input, like dollars to support acquisition of food and water, transportation of food, and storage of food. Lessons can be learned from food companies, bringing them down to the individual or community level. Both can follow, with some small modifications, the same basic food security outline: • know the family (or community) and necessary food products, • assess the risks, • formulate a plan, and • test the plan.

38

Every family is different in its needs and in what family members consider to be acceptable food products. Some families and communities may have specific dietary needs because of health or cultural requirements. Emergency food supplies not meeting these requirements do not address the need. Plans have to recognize the needs and arrange for meeting them. Again, communities filled with household planning for those contingencies are more secure communities Emergencies cause incredible amounts of stress, which may naturally depress appetites. It is important to choose food products that will provide sufficient nutrition while proving palatable

enough to encourage consumption. Some food products require water in their preparation, and water is a key ingredient for human survival. Food and water supplies have to be kept close by, so that in an emergency both are readily available and widely dispersed.

Families and communities also need to continuously assess risks. Living in the South, the author and his family know first-hand the danger posed by hurricanes. When hurricanes are forecast, staples such as bread and milk disappear from store shelves in a matter of hours. When risks are known ahead of time, families and communities can devise plans and make purchases before disaster arrives.

Once plans are formulated, test, test, and retest.

Now, back to the possibility that supplies might be lost because of a storm. What good does a cache of emergency food do if it is washed away in a flood or blown away in a storm? This is why foodsecure communities are made up of food-secure households. In the next emergency, your home might be the one that remains untouched. Then again, your home might not survive. Nearby family or friends who maintain food-secure households can act as the first responders to your family’s food needs, or vice versa. Work together with neighbors to make plans so that if one location becomes uninhabitable, another location is available,

reachable, and contains the emergency food and water stores needed for all.

Think about the plan so simple mistakes are not made—remember the man who purchased an electric chainsaw, only to find that the trees and branches he expected to remove after an approaching hurricane had severed the electrical lines to the house? We can laugh about that example, but similar mistakes are made all the time.

Have you thought about how you will open canned food if your electric can opener isn’t working?

Assume nothing, consider the options, and create redundancies and contingencies.

Communities made up of households that understand and practice food security are communities less likely to experience widespread food emergencies in the face of natural- or terroristrelated disasters. Food-secure households make food-secure neighborhoods, which in turn make food-secure communities, which make food-secure regions and a food-secure nation. You get the picture. Response to disasters, regardless of their origin, is everybody’s responsibility.

For more information about disasters and emergency supplies go to: http://www.ready.gov/basic-disastersupplies-kit

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

C

onsumers need to understand the complexities of modern food production so they can prepare for disruptions.

39

The Chicken Business 40

By Jacqueline Kochak

The poultry industry’s challenges Are Our goals

C

onsumers today want “green,” “organic,” and “humane,” and in the future those consumer desires will add significantly to the cost of producing poultry meat and eggs, say two long-time poultry science professors.

“By the next generation, cost and social factors will have an enormous effect on what we are eating,” says Dr. Ed Moran, a New Jersey native who came to Auburn after 25 years at the University of Guelph in Canada and whose research over the years has focused on poultry nutrition. Moran is now retired.

One problem, the two professors say, is that most people today have almost no idea how their food—including poultry products—makes it from the farm to the table.

“The population at large is almost fully divorced from animal agriculture and food production. They need to be educated so they’re not shocked when they learn how food is produced,” says Dr. Sarge Bilgili, who notes that his own young daughter was

devastated to learn that a chicken had to be killed before it showed up fricasseed on her plate.

“People ask us why we don’t let chickens roam around outside,” Bilgili says. “Well, we know from experience that when they’re outside they get sick, they’re exposed to extremes in the weather, and the foxes get them. We have found they are better protected inside.”

As society changes, however, the poultry industry changes. That means being aware of the public’s interest in animal welfare issues and trying to be transparent. And what matters to the poultry industry in Alabama matters to Auburn University’s poultry science department, both professors say.

“The industry’s challenges become our goals,” says Bilgili, who started out as a veterinarian in his native Turkey. An assistant professor at Istanbul University, he got the opportunity to study in the United States and decided to focus on poultry science. He knew nothing about the subject, but

nobody at the Istanbul University specialized in the subject and a commercial poultry industry was starting to emerge in his country. He ended up staying in this country, later moving to Alabama with his major professor.

And poultry is big business in Alabama. The poultry industry includes two different kinds of chicken farmers—those who raise “broilers” for meat, and those who keep “layers” for egg production. Broilers accounted for some $2.4 billion in agricultural income to the state in 2007, while layers accounted for some $315 million. By the 1970s, farm income from broiler production had eclipsed income from field crops. Accounting for some 66 percent of Alabama’s farm commodity income, broilers are the state’s most important agricultural commodity.

The state produces some one billion broilers a year, making Alabama historically one of the three top broiler-producing states in the U.S., along with Arkansas and Georgia. Between

41

Dr. Ed Moran and Dr. Sarge Bilgili

42

them, the three states usually produce more than one-third of the nine billion broilers produced annually nationwide.

Back in the early 1900s, raising poultry was a home-based business. The first Auburn course in poultry husbandry was taught in the old Alabama Polytechnic Institute’s animal industry department.

Poultry husbandry courses were moved into home economics in 1920, because chicken husbandry was very much the province of the females of the family.

Women raised chickens to provide eggs for their families and to make a little extra income by

selling eggs to others. Each household kept a few chickens, feeding them kitchen scraps and allowing them to forage in the yard. In return, these “yard birds” each produced several dozen eggs a year.

The original intent of raising chickens wasn’t to eat them, Bilgili notes.

Raising layers to provide eggs began evolving into an industry after the boll weevil was introduced into Alabama from Mexico in 1915, devastating Alabama’s staple crop—cotton. Although the Black Belt counties in south Alabama are noted for their fertility, the red clay of north Alabama is not conducive to agriculture, Bilgili says, so farmers saw poultry farming as a possibility.

“Poultry was an alternate crop to cotton—soil conditions don’t affect poultry,” he says. “In addition, labor was available and competitive, land was available, and the climate is temperate.”

Bilgili points out that the Agricultural Experiment Station system in the U.S. has been very important to agricultural research, stimulating and supporting poultry science research. As a result, poultry science departments have contributed significantly to the development of the industry in their states and the nation, he adds.

The Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station system was established by the 1887 Hatch Act, which created the state’s land-grant universities

with which they are associated. Scientists affiliated with these research centers around the state do research to solve problems in the food and agriculture industries and transfer technology through agricultural extension programs.

That research underpins much of the curricula at the land-grant universities as well as the programs of the Cooperative Extension System, created in 1914 by the Smith-Lever Act to inform farmers and the public about current agricultural research.

The first Alabama Cooperative Extension poultry specialist was hired in 1921.

In 1924 the poultry program became part of API’s Animal Industry Department. A separate Poultry Husbandry Department was established in 1929. In 1934, the program was subsumed by the Animal Husbandry Department, re-emerging in 1947 as a separate department again. The unit was renamed the Department of Poultry Science in 1961.

Over the years, API’s—and later Auburn University’s—poultry department developed in concert and worked closely with the state’s poultry industry, doing the research that addressed the problems plaguing producers.

“Part of what poultry science research does is help producers be more competitive and produce more economically,” says Moran.

for their eggs. Chickens raised for meat were called “broilers,” and by the 1940s the idea was spreading. In the 1950s, consumer demand for chicken meat skyrocketed.

Land in the Midwest is more fertile and conducive to row crops, so the broiler industry found a home in north Alabama. In addition to a mild climate and cheap labor, another draw was the Tennessee River system, which provided an efficient way to bring in corn and soybeans from the Midwest to feed the hungry broilers. Local, regional, and national feed companies built feed mills along the waterways, manufacturing chicken feed for farmers.

“A huge quantity of grain is barged in along the Tennessee River and the rail system,” says Bilgili.

“There is not enough feed grain in Alabama to feed the poultry raised here—one time we calculated that Alabama’s grain could only feed the state’s poultry for a couple of weeks.”

The poultry industry in Alabama originally consisted of farms growing breeds selected for their egg-laying prowess. In the 1930s and the 1940s state poultry operations grew, but the industry in the South lagged behind other regions and egg-laying farms gradually shifted west. By the late 1920s, however, a new idea in poultry production had emerged—raising chickens for their meat, not

Contributions Researchers in the Auburn University Department of Poultry Science have made meaningful contributions to the industry over the years.

“In the early years, there was a significant amount of research done at Auburn on artificial

light to promote egg production,” says Bilgili.

This research included developing an all-night lighting program for laying hens. In 1935, the “sack-cement” house was developed as a low-cost way for small farmers to move their flock indoors.

The house, which cost only $3 to $5, consisted of burlap sacks hung on a pole frame and painted with a cement mixture.

“Industry’s challenges become our goals,” Moran says. “As the industry moved toward broiler production, a significant contribution was the development of the first vaccine for coccidiosis, a parasitic disease of the intestinal tract.”

Coccidiosis, a parasite that damages the chicken’s gut wall, is passed on in the droppings of infected 43 chickens and reduces the efficiency of growth. A vaccine was developed by Dr. Alan Edgar fifty years ago and was important because it allowed, for the first time, intensive production of poultry.

Auburn researchers also developed vaccines for infectious bursal disease and fowl pox, and determined the major histocompatibility complex blood groupings for broilers. In the early ’70s, an automatic poultry beak trimmer was invented— chickens whose beaks aren’t trimmed are prone to pecking their companions, sometimes causing serious injury or death and leading to the description “henpecked.” Dr. G. R. McDaniel was instrumental

in developing artificial insemination programs and separate feeding programs for broiler breeders.

The 1950s brought something called “vertical integration” to Alabama’s poultry industry. With the vertical integration model, one company owns the breeding farms, hatcheries, feed mill, and the processing plant. The “integrator” provides chickens and feed to a farmer with whom a contract has been arranged, providing economic stability for the farmers and reducing their risk. Several crossbreeds of meat-type chickens have been bred for hybrid vigor, good meat, good weight, and good legs.

In the beginning, a commodity—chickens— was produced. Now, when broilers reach market 44 age, they are processed in a facility owned by the parent company, adding value. Mechanization has

made it more economical to do the processing in a plant instead of a butcher shop, so the days of buying a bled and plucked chicken in the butcher shop are almost gone.

In the early ’80s, the industry went even further, evolving from being in the “chicken business” to being in the “food business,” Bilgili says.

“An example is the introduction of McDonald’s Chicken McNuggets in the 1980s,” Bilgili says.

“Nuggets were developed in a lab and made a huge impact on how broiler meat is consumed and marketed. Our research began to target chicken as a food item rather than as a chicken—hence, we started looking at the composition of the meat, the quality of the meat, the chicken’s organoleptic attributes, the taste, and the texture. When you’re just producing chickens, you’re not always thinking about how the meat will eventually look.”

For the last 25 years, Auburn poultry science researchers have been looking at those food attributes, with much of the research in parallel with the industry. In fact, Bilgili says, Auburn was one of the first to integrate production and processing systems in research.

“The current challenges depend on the people you’re talking to, because different companies have different problems that change from year to year,” Moran says.

The big problems in the early days involved keeping chickens alive, because the mortality rates were very high. Today, researchers are dealing with consumer concerns—and misconceptions. Fifty or sixty years ago, poultry growers used the hormone DES to castrate roosters because their testes are internal. Hormones haven’t been used in many decades, but some chickens are still advertised as “hormone-free.” In reality, they’re all produced hormone-free.

“We’re still fighting the hormone myth. The biggest challenge today is educating people about how their food is produced,” Bilgili repeats.

Moran says another big problem for poultry producers is dealing with the laws and regulations about the environment and water and land use.

People often don’t want poultry farmers as their neighbors because of the nuisance issues, such as odor and flies. As a result, the poultry industry is now flourishing in other countries.

“Water flows to the path of less resistance,” Bilgili says, referring to the relatively low production cost of food in other countries. “Forty percent of our fresh produce is imported, but locally produced food is always preferred by consumers and the markets. Almost 100 percent of the broiler meat we consume is produced in the U.S. That’s certainly something to brag about! ”

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

A

uburn’s Department of Poultry Science is one of the premier poultry science departments in the world.

45

Pressure on the Poultry Industry

By Ken Macklin

46

Putting a stop to all antibiotics Is complicated

B

ecause I am a poultry scientist with an Alabama Cooperative Extension System appointment, my research is practical. My work has to benefit the more than 3,000 poultry farmers in Alabama, and the state’s $15 billion poultry industry.

As some people are aware, consumers are concerned about the use of antibiotics in livestock because they fear their use is promoting the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria—killer bugs immune to our arsenal of modern medicines.

That is one area of research I am involved with.

However, this is a complicated and politically charged subject. It is easy to say, “Let’s get rid of all antibiotics in animal production,” but that is not as simple as it sounds.

Some poultry producers include low—or as it is also called, “subtherapeutic”—levels of antibiotics in the feed provided to their birds. These antibiotics, which are typically not the same as those used in human medicine, are administered below the

level considered therapeutic for treating disease.

What these subtherapeutic levels of antibiotics do is modify the gut environment so that nutrients are utilized more efficiently. When they eat a diet containing low levels of antibiotics, broilers (the poultry raised for meat) grow more quickly and

Ken Macklin studies a Bacillus specimen, a type of bacteria used in many probiotics. These “good bacteria” will eliminate “bad bacteria” like Salmonella, E. coli, and Clostridium perfringens, he says.

uniformly, and they are less likely to contract a disease. If producers cut antibiotics out of animal production, poultry is less meaty and will take longer to rear. If farmers produce less or if poultry takes longer to raise, consumers pay more in the grocery store and at their favorite restaurants.

Antibiotics also are used in poultry production to reduce bacteria levels. One such bacterium is Salmonella, a pathogen that lives in the intestinal tracts of chickens and other animals. Although Salmonella doesn’t make the chickens sick, the bacterium is a serious cause of foodborne illness in humans. Salmonellosis, as the illness is called, causes diarrhea, fever, and stomach cramps and is one of the most prevalent causes of foodborne illness, accounting for some one million cases every year.

Seeking Antibiotic Alternatives Finding viable alternatives to antibiotics to control disease and reduce the incidence of

47

48

foodborne pathogens like Salmonella is of high priority for me. One example of this is that I have looked at over two dozen essential oils, including oregano, thyme, cinnamon, and clove oil, in my laboratory under controlled conditions. Essential oils are natural oils distilled from plants and other sources, called “essential� because they carry the distinctive scent or essence of the plant. Natural foods devotees often tout the benefits of these oils, and I have found them to be effective in the lab in eliminating Salmonella and other pathogens associated with poultry.

When we add an essential oil to the chicken feed, however, it suppresses bird growth. I think the birds are deterred from eating the feed with an essential oil added because they don’t like the taste.

Additionally, in the birds we tested, we did not see a reduction in Salmonella or pathogens that make poultry sick.

Some researchers have had better success than I with essential oils, and that underscores one of the underlying problems with using essential oils as an antibiotic replacement. Plants that are used to extract the essential oils are grown in fields throughout the world, which means they are not standardized. For example, oregano oil extracted from plants grown in New Mexico would be different from oregano oil extracted from plants grown

in Italy. Conditions such as the amount of rain and the soil composition make a difference in the oil’s properties. The advantage that antibiotics have is that they are produced under controlled conditions and, unlike essential oils, we know exactly how to administer them and how they will interact with bacteria to destroy pathogens.

Mark Liles, an associate professor in Biological Sciences, and I have also looked at using Bacillus to eliminate Salmonella in both the chicken and in the poultry house environment. Bacillus is a genus of gram-positive, rod-shaped bacteria that can form a spore, produces natural antibiotics, and with a few exceptions, is safe to ingest. Bacillus is typically the bacteria used in the probiotics sold at the store. To date we have had mixed results; in the lab under controlled conditions, Salmonella is eliminated, and in one study Bacillus seemed to reduced Salmonella levels in the birds themselves, but our results are preliminary and I do not want to overstate our success. It is interesting to note that these same Bacillus are also being looked at as a way to control other diseases associated with both fish and poultry.

Because of consumer pressure, subtherapeutic use of antibiotics in poultry production has diminished by at least 40 percent in the past decade, and this decline will continue in the

coming years. Consumers want antibiotic-free poultry, and if consumers are willing to pay a little more the poultry producers will accommodate them. There is a lot of misunderstanding about antibiotic use in agriculture, however. For example, a few years back Tyson Foods advertised its chickens as being raised “without antibiotics,” but in fact they did use a poultry feed additive called an ionophore to treat a parasitic disease caused coccidiosis. Ionophores are classified by the USDA as an antibiotic, but ionophores are not used in humans and are not considered to contribute to antibiotic resistance. So is it harmful? Probably not, but the company stopped using the label at the direction of a federal judge after competitors alleged Tyson’s claim cost them millions of dollars.

The Problem with Salmonellosis So you’ve got poultry companies operating with a slim profit margin, and at the same time you’ve

Bacillus

got consumers increasingly demanding antibioticfree poultry. Now add foodborne illness to the picture. For example, there is still the question of how we get rid of salmonellosis—one of the most common foodborne illnesses, often caused by poultry and eggs.

Of course, the public is routinely warned about the risk of Salmonella in poultry meat itself—a small amount of the pathogen probably won’t make you sick, but if you leave raw chicken at room temperature, Salmonella multiplies rapidly.

The poultry industry is very concerned about Salmonella. Poultry farmers are basically contract workers who raise the birds while the poultry company—the integrator—provides feed, birds, 49 veterinary care, and technical support. Poultry farmers work under the assumption that the chicks and feed they receive from the integrator are Salmonella-free and that, as long as they follow good “biosecurity” measures, Salmonella and other potentially detrimental pathogens are kept from their poultry.

But what is biosecurity? Essentially farmers are supposed to change their clothes when they leave the poultry house as well as wear different boots or shoe covers, and of course, they must wash their hands. On the farm, they should have an effective rodent and insect control program as well as main-

tain the farm in a way to discourage other animals from getting into the poultry house. Additionally, they need to keep track of all visitors to the farm to prevent the introduction or spread of Salmonella or other pathogens on their farm—or their neighbor’s farm, for that matter.

Indeed, the average farmer will follow biosecurity measures because he doesn’t want an infectious disease to sicken or kill his chickens, which will cause him to lose money. The problem with Salmonella, however, is that this pathogen doesn’t cause disease in chickens. Farmers don’t know their birds are infected because they look completely healthy and the birds’ growth is 50 not affected.

Salmonella in the Environment In addition to finding alternatives to antibiotics, a lot of my research has focused on ways to improve facilities or management as a way of controlling pathogens in the environment. For example, I helped develop and refine a technique known as “windrow composting” on poultry farms.

The process of windrow composting allows poultry farmers to recondition the litter so they can get a little more use out of it. Typically, poultry farmers put down clean bedding once a year and then raise seven or eight flocks on the same bedding.

In agriculture in general, windrow composting is the production of compost by piling organic matter or biodegradable waste, such as manure, in long rows called windrows. On a poultry farm, you plow the litter into a pile down the center of the poultry house, allow the internal temperature to get to 130°F, and let the pile to sit for three or more days. After that time, the farmer either breaks the windrow up and spreads the litter out, or turns the pile for better pathogen reduction.

By remixing the windrow a little bit, you reintroduce oxygen to the windrow, which allows the windrow to heat up again, killing bacteria, viruses, and parasites. This is not true compost because of the short period of time involved, and the process is more aptly thought of as pasteurizing the litter. This technique has been adopted nationally as a way of controlling all sorts of poultry pathogens and as a way to recondition the litter.

Windrow composting between flocks eliminates another foodborne bacterium, Campylobacter, in litter and vastly reduces Salmonella and other pathogens. The process is simple but can be labor-intensive. The reason most poultry farmers are willing to go to the effort is because their chickens grow better, which means they will earn more money when the birds are sold back to the

integrator. The poultry companies are happy, because they are reducing disease and see better uniformity among the birds. Some companies have even mandated the practice, but with mixed success; if a farmer is forced to windrow and does it carelessly, the practice doesn’t work as well.

I have looked at several ways to control ammonia, which can damage chickens’ lungs in poultry houses. The most common way is to acidify litter with an acidifying litter amendment, which is very effective in controlling ammonia. A pitfall with these products is that they seem to help protect Salmonella in the bedding, which can lead to colonization in the birds. A novel method we have been working on is adding microbes to the litter to control ammonia and inhibit Salmonella.

These studies have shown some promise but are far from becoming practical.

Some poultry companies also vaccinate birds used to breed broiler chicks and those used for egg production as a way to reduce the incidence of Salmonella. A problem is that even with vaccination there is no way to eliminate 100 percent of the Salmonella in a flock. It is like that old Listerine commercial—you can eliminate 99.999 percent of the bacteria. In an egg-laying barn, you might have a million birds, and .001 percent would mean 1,000 birds were still colonized. All it takes is one

bird to spread Salmonella in the environment, in the flock, and into the food chain.

The Industry’s Biggest Challenge As I have suggested, none of these intervention techniques is a silver bullet that allows a farmer to say with a 100 percent conviction that his birds or eggs are Salmonella-free when they go to market.

So obviously one of the industry’s biggest challenges is controlling Salmonella.

Vaccination has been somewhat successful in controlling—but not eliminating—the pathogen.

With thousands of Salmonella serovars, or distinct variations within a subspecies, it is difficult with current technologies to develop a vaccine that will be effective against all of them. You cannot get complete coverage against every Salmonella serovar present, usually only the major serovars are covered. What this means is that Salmonella, and vaccinations are only effective for six months before another serovar that wasn’t in the vaccine becomes the predominant one found.

Poultry companies in general are reluctant to vaccinate against a pathogen like Salmonella that does not make poultry sick. Not only is there no guarantee the vaccine will be effective, but vaccinated birds lose performance. A decrease in performance means the birds do not grow as well

and lack uniformity in size, and it is impossible to overstate the importance of uniformity. Processing goes more smoothly if, for example, all the chicken breasts are the same size. In addition, large-scale buyers like McDonald’s desire uniformity. With 13,000 restaurants in the U.S. and more than 30,000 worldwide, if McDonald’s wants something from suppliers, McDonald’s gets it. That is one of the reasons more poultry is being raised without use of antibiotics—McDonald’s antibiotic-free poultry.

That is also part of the reason poultry producers are so very conservative and averse to change.

Change is a gamble, unless the change is virtually guaranteed to help. If a poultry company has a contract with McDonald’s or another large customer, that contract requires broilers to be grown to a certain size. If the poultry company changes the feeding program, this could affect the birds’ growth, which may or may not change the specifications. Losing a big contract or market share could potentially bankrupt a poultry company.

I know that poultry companies are not the bad guys—they are trying to make a wholesome and affordable food product for consumers. I believe that abuse of antibiotics in human and companionanimal medicine is far more pervasive than in agriculture, but unfortunately, agriculture is an easier target than people or their pets. Poultry companies

51

are worried about completely eliminating antibiotics, because the company that stops using antibiotics to help control disease could be the first to fail in a competitive marketplace.

The poultry farmers I know work hard, and in general they do their best to provide us with safe food. So you can see why so much of the research I do with my Extension appointment is pragmatic.

I take to heart the challenges faced by poultry integrators and farmers.

i

n

f

o

c

u

s

A Model Mill: Improving Feed Quality and Efficiency—and Education

by Karen Hunley

52

Poultry Science Department head Don Conner (standing, right) and research unit director Mitchell Pate (second from right), join staff and students at the new $7.1 million Auburn Poultry and Animal Nutrition Center.

What factors do you consider when buying eggs or poultry? Freshness, fat content, or whether the food is organic might come to mind first. But do you think about what exactly those chickens spent their lives eating? There is an entire science dedicated to what poultry consumes, and the subject is increasingly important, says Dr. Don Conner, head of the Poultry Science Department at Auburn University.

Several years ago, Conner and his team recognized the need for a special facility at Auburn University where this research could be carried out.

They began visiting feed mills at other universities.

Only two other facilities like the planned Auburn University Poultry and Animal Nutrition Center existed in the country—one at North Carolina State University and one at California Polytechnic State University. Conner’s team modeled its center on the Animal Nutrition Center at Cal Poly.

The feed mill had strong industry support early on, and in 2008 a technical advisory committee

composed of poultry nutritionists and feed mill personnel was formed to provide input on the facility’s design and equipment. More than 40 corporations donated to the facility, including one gift of $750,000 in equipment.

In November 2012, the new Poultry and Animal Nutrition Center opened on Auburn Lakes Road just off Highway 280 northwest of the city. Conner notes that it was time for a facility like this in Alabama, since about 10 to 12 percent of chickens consumed nationwide come from the state.

The $7.1 million feed mill has the cutting-edge technology and equipment to meet Auburn’s research needs as well as provide outreach through short courses for the feed and poultry industries.

Housed inside a 12,500-square-foot steel building, the facility consists of nine prefabricated modules, each 40 feet long by 8 feet wide by 9 feet and 6 inches high. The facility is small but scaled to a commercial feed mill, so research results can be applied to larger mills.

Conner says the Poultry and Animal Nutrition Center provides research to help the feed industry be as efficient as possible in feeding poultry, which is vital because of rising population and competition for food.

“Corn, soy beans, rice, wheat—all those general plant materials used for food—there is more pressure to conserve them,” he said. “Humans and animals compete for food.”

And both compete with the biofuel industry, which is converting ethanol (from corn) into fuel and raising the price of corn as a result, Conner adds.

Being “efficient” in the poultry feed industry means producing as much meat and as many eggs as you can from as little feed as possible. This means designing recipes for feed based on what specific type of chicken you are feeding. Layer feed, for example, is given to chickens that are bred to lay eggs, while broiler chickens receive a different type of feed. Mixing recipes is all about converting the right amount of plant protein and other nutrients into feed that will yield high-quality meat and eggs.

“We look at what little bit of this and that you put in to increase the nutritional value of the diet,” Conner explains.

Keeping poultry feed clean and sanitary is also a focus of the center. In fact, Conner says he hopes

that practices at the campus feed mill will serve as a model for safe practices at large commercial mills, which are not always known for their cleanliness.

“We have about 120 million chickens on farms in Alabama right now, and they are eating 23 hours a day,” Conner says. “We cannot shut down our feed industry because we let something unsafe get into our feed.”

To promote safety standards, the center is planning to host short courses targeting personnel at commercial feed mills. Again, the pressure to be efficient in producing feed factors in to the importance of mill cleanliness. Feed that is contaminated cannot be used.

“There is a real need for continuing education,” Conner says. “The industry is going to have to move to more sanitary design, hygiene, and food safety programs.”

Outreach courses will also give instruction on what can be substituted into feed—without sacrificing nutrition—if plant materials like corn and soy beans become too expensive.

The center is serving as a dynamic hands-on aid in the education of Auburn University poultry science students as well. Because of the modular design, it is especially good for teaching since a person can stand in one spot and see the whole facility. By contrast, a commercial mill is about five

stories high, which makes it difficult for students to get a sense of the whole operation.

“We need to get every bit of nutrition out of what we are feeding our animals, and our students need to understand the importance of that,” Conner notes.

In fact, the feed mill is primarily operated by students, which helps equip them with the knowledge and skills needed to work in the industry.

“The pressure to be efficient in what we are feeding our poultry is going to continue to increase in the future,” Conner says. Auburn students will be well prepared to meet that challenge.

53

Housed inside a 12,500-square-foot steel building, the feed mill is comprised of nine prefabricated modules, each 40 feet long by 8 feet wide by 9 feet and 6 inches high.

The Scourge of IBV 54

B y F r e d e r i k W. va n G i n k e l

Developing an Ocular Vaccination Against Avian Coronavirus Infectious Bronchitis Virus

A

labama is a major U.S. chicken producer, only outdone by Arkansas and Georgia, with 1,033 billion birds produced in 2010. That represents $2.79 billion in cash revenues, based on Alabama agricultural statistics collected by the USDA National Agricultural StatisticsService.

Alabama also produced 2.18 billion eggs in 2010, representing $291.3 million in cash receipts. The poultry industry is a major player in the Alabama economy, and with that comes the need to protect this industry against avian diseases.

One of the more persistent diseases in the poultry industry, despite extensive vaccination efforts, is infectious bronchitis virus (IBV). IBV is a coronavirus that causes a highly contagious respiratory disease in chickens of all ages. Unlike coronaviruses that have recently been in the news, IBV infects chickens but does not affect humans.

Coronaviruses, like other respiratory viruses, are associated with diseases of the eye and use the eye for entry into the host to initially replicate.

This is also true for IBV, which first replicates in the Harderian gland, an eye-associated lymphoid tissue. After initial replication in the Harderian glands, which secretes fluids to help the tear glands, IBV invades other tissues such as the trachea, lungs, and air sacs. This is followed by a short period of viremia (the presence of the virus in the blood), which causes subsequent infection of the kidneys and oviducts.

IBV causes economic loss to producers of both the “layers” that produce eggs and the “broilers” that produce meat. Layers and breeders infected early in life can sustain permanent damage to the oviduct, the tube through which the egg passes from the ovaries. As infected birds mature, they may appear indistinguishable from normal hens, showing no signs of disease. However, they will produce few or no eggs. For the farmer, the failure to lay eggs is both a loss of productivity and an economic loss because of the cost of feeding and housing the unproductive hens. After an IBV infec-

tion, a hen’s egg production generally never returns to pre-infection rates, and eggs may not hatch. For producers of broilers, IBV causes economic loss by reducing the birds’ growth rate and facilitating bacterial infection, which leads to rejection of the birds for consumption at processing plants.

IBV has an incubation period of about 18 to 48 hours, and coughing, sneezing, and tracheal 55 rales (or rattles) become evident within 10 to 14 days after infection. Symptoms include wet eyes, swollen faces, tracheal and kidney lesions, respiratory disease, reduced weight gain in broilers, and decreasing egg production and egg quality in layers. The severity of symptoms depends on the virulence of the IBV strain, as well as the age and immune status of the flock.

Vaccination programs are complicated by the fact that there are various IBV serotypes (variations within a species) and antigenic variants. Antigenic variation refers to a phenomenon in which an infectious organism alters its surface proteins to

evade the host’s immune response. As a result, immunity induced by vaccination against a single serotype generally provides insufficient protection against other serotypes. Live-attenuated IBV vaccines, first used in 1950, provide protection against a homologous challenge, or challenge by similar IBV strains. Cross-protection against different IBV serotypes, however, is limited.

For that reason, a vaccination process called “priming and boosting,” in which different IBV serotypes are employed, is often used to provide better cross-protection. For example, a practice in

Alabama is to vaccinate broilers against IBV at the hatchery when they are just one day old, using the Arkansas serotype and one other IBV serotype, such as Massachusetts or Delaware 072. The chickens are “boosted” about two weeks later in the broiler house, and layers are normally further boosted before lay with an inactivated IBV vaccine.

The use of multiple IBV serotypes for vaccination increases cross-protection to IBV field strains.

However, controlling IBV with vaccines is difficult because of IBV’s high mutation rate, which allows it to quickly evolve into variants or new serotypes

56

that can escape the immune response induced by the vaccine. Four UK strains of three different serotypes were found to differ by only 2-3 percent of their S1 amino acids. The S1 sequences were also very similar to those of three Dutch isolates (D207, D274 and D3896).

Researchers in Auburn University’s Department of Pathobiology in the College of Veterinary Medicine have the unique expertise to provide a better understanding of the role of vaccine-induced IBV-specific immunity on the control of IBV field strains in the poultry industry. Therefore, we set out to better understand the IBV-specific antibody responses in plasma and tears induced after ocular IBV vaccination, as well as the cell-mediated immune responses in the spleen and the mucosal immune compartment of the head-associated lymphoid tissues (HALT), specifically the Harderian glands and conjunctiva-associated lymphoid tissues (CALT).

Humoral Immune Responses

Scientists from Switzerland and Turkey visit Auburn to learn about avian immune response to IBV.

IBV is transmitted by inhalation or through ingestion of contaminated feed, water, or feces. In the southeastern U.S., including Alabama, the Arkserotype is the most prevalent despite extensive vaccination. The most common vaccine used is the live-attenuated Arkansas-Delmarva Poultry

Industries (ArkDPI) vaccine. Its use raised the question of whether this vaccine is capable of generating strong mucosal and systemic IBV-specific antibody responses to protect against subsequent IBV exposure.

We previously demonstrated that the eyeassociated lymphoid structures—the Harderian glands and conjunctiva-associated lymphoid tissue—induce strong immune responses after ocular exposure to an antigen (a substance that induces antibodies, the front-line soldiers of the immune system). Their epithelium—one of four basic types of animal tissue, along with connective tissue, muscle tissue, and nervous tissue, that lines the surfaces and the body cavities—expresses the receptor that is needed to transport antibodies across the epithelium into tears and eye-associated mucosa, where the antibodies protect against viruses such as IBV. To determine whether these lymphoid tissues also play a role in IBV-specific immune responses, we developed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) specific to IBV. ELISA tests use antibodies and color change to identify reactivity with a substance, and this assay specifically measures IBV-specific immunoglobulin A (IgA) and immunoglobulin G (IgG, also called IgY in chickens) antibody levels in plasma and tears after

IBV vaccination. IgG antibody levels are normally high in blood, while divalent IgA antibodies are normally found in mucosal secretions, because these divalent IgA antibodies are actively transported across the mucosal epithelium. IgA found in chicken tears is predominantly divalent (containing two IgA molecules), while the IgA found in plasma is predominantly monovalent.

One important role of IBV-specific antibodies is neutralization of the virus. After the first IBV immunization, IgA antibody levels were considerably higher than IgG antibody levels in both tears and plasma, and the IgA antibody levels increased about three days earlier than IgG antibodies; however, upon boosting the IBV response, IgG antibodies were more prevalent than IgA antibodies. Thus, a switch from IgA to IgG antibodies occurred in the secondary response to IBV. Based on the IBV-specific enzyme-linked immunospot assay, which detects plasma cells that secrete IBV-specific antibodies, the Harderian glands were important contributors to IgA antibodies in tears, while the spleen generated the most IgG IBV-specific antibody-secreting cells.

Ocular vaccination against IBV induces robust mucosal IgA responses in the head-associated lymphoid tissues (conjunctiva-associated lymphoid tissue and Harderian glands), with the responses

57

Avian lymphocytes are isolated in a biosafety cabinet in order to measure the immune response to the infectious bronchitis virus.

Point Mutations and Antibody Protection

58

translating into high antibody levels to IBV in tears. IgA antibodies are important in resistance to IBV, in particular the antibodies found in tears.

Therefore, the lack of protective immunity by IBV vaccines is not because of a lack of mucosal IgA or IgG antibody production in the head-associated lymphoid tissues, but is likely due to the high degree of antigenic variation of the virus.

The name of coronaviruses, such as IBV, is derived from their appearance: they form a crown or halo of spike (S) proteins. Since the S1 part of the IBV spike protein is important in host attachment and, therefore, an important target for generating virus-neutralizing antibodies, we took a closer look at the role of S1 in generating IBV-specific antibodies after ocular vaccination. We also looked at whether these antibodies could recognize an IBV field strain. Unlike the live-attenuated IBV strains used for vaccinations, field strains are virulent, fully pathogenic IBV strains that infect chicken flocks in the poultry industry.

After ocular vaccination with the live-attenuated ArkDPI vaccine, approximately 23 percent fewer IgA and IgG IBV-specific antibody-secreting cells were observed in the spleen in response to the IBV field strain as compared to the vaccine strain.

In addition, plasma contained significantly lower virus-neutralizing antibody titers to the field strain.

Thus, changes in an IBV field strain relative to the vaccine strain reduced antibody recognition and neutralization and presumably contributed to immune escape. This immune escape occurs because the immune response induced by IBV vaccines is

not able to inhibit IBV field strains due to accumulated changes in these viruses. These changes occur to the extent that the vaccine-induced antibodies no longer protect the chickens against IBV because the antibodies no longer recognize the field IBV strain and no longer neutralize the virus allowing infection of the host.

To determine in more detail how the change in antibody recognition played a role in immune escape, we focused on responses to the S1 protein containing the host attachment domain of the virus. For this purpose we synthesized overlapping 17 amino acid long peptides that covered the whole S1 sequence of the vaccine strain as well as all peptides containing point mutations of an IBV field strain. Epitopes are the part of an antigen molecule, in this case the S1 protein, to which an IBV vaccine-induced antibody attaches itself and which are referred to as S1 B cell epitopes. The epitopes that were located in the host attachment site decreased their reactivity by ~75 percent for IgA plasma and tears antibodies to the IBV field strain when compared to the vaccine strain. No reduction in antibody reactivity was observed for three dominant B cell epitopes outside the host attachment site. Of the IgG B cell epitopes identified on the S1 protein, only one was located in the host attachment domain and contained a point muta-

tion. This one amino acid change resulted in a 43 percent reduction of IgG antibody recognition of the field strain epitope in plasma and no change for IgG antibodies in tears. Based on the robust IgG antibody responses observed against whole IBV and the relatively limited responses to S1-based peptides, one could argue that IgG antibodies are more prone to recognize conformational B cell epitopes rather than linear peptide epitopes.

Our data is consistent with IBV field strains evading the host IBV vaccine-induced antibody response through selection of point mutations in field strains in the host attachment domain, presumably due to vaccine-induced immune pressure of mucosal IgA antibodies. IBV-specific IgA has been correlated with resistance to IBV in chicken lines. Thus, decreased virus neutralization, in particular by mucosal IgA of the IBV coronavirus, may allow reinfection of the host by IBV field strains that are sufficiently different from the vaccine.

Cell-Mediated Immune Response Besides the above-listed importance of antibodies, which are produced by B cells and may neutralize the virus, another important immune protection mechanism is cell-mediated immunity.

In cell-mediated immune responses, T cells—a kind of lymphocyte (white blood cell), like B

cells—play an important role. Specifically, cytotoxic T cells kill virus-infected cells. After ocular IBV vaccination lymphocytes proliferate, and their numbers expand in the HALT and spleen. This increase coincides with an increase in another kind of T cells referred to as T effector cells, which are important in combating the virus.

The involvement of cell-mediated immune responses in an immune response to the live-attenuated IBV vaccine can be analyzed by measuring the expression of interferon-γ (IFN-γ), a cytokine that is important for activating both innate and adaptive immunity to viral infections and that also inhibits virus replication. IFN-γ is produced by natural killer cells in the innate response and by cytotoxic T cells and type 1 T helper cells in the adaptive immune response.

After ocular IBV inoculation, we looked at HALT and the spleen to analyze the expression of IFN-g and the enzymes (granzyme A and perforin) that are involved in killing virus-infected cells. Increased IFN-γ expression was observed in the mucosal immune compartment, i.e., HALT, after primary IBV vaccination, but shifted to the systemic immune compartment, i.e., the spleen, after boosting. In contrast, the expression of the cytotoxicity-associated genes, granzyme A and perforin, remained associated with the conjunc-

tiva-associated lymphoid tissues after boosting.

Thus, the IFN-g response switched from mucosal tissues in the primary to the systemic compartment, i.e., spleen, in the memory response. This kind of memory response is referred to as a central memory response, while the cytotoxic effector response remains associated with the mucosal lymphoid tissue CALT.

Immunodeficiency Viruses and IBV The induction of IBV-specific immunity is further complicated by the ubiquitous presence in the poultry industry of viruses that target the immune system and cause depletion of lymphocytes. Infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) targets B lymphocytes and potentially decreases IBV-specific antibody levels in both plasma and mucosal secretion such as tears. Chicken anemia virus (CAV) targets T lymphocytes, reducing the cytotoxic (CD8+) and T helper (CD4+) cell levels affecting the cellular immune responses.

These immunosuppressing viruses, i.e., IBDV and CAV, are found everywhere in the poultry industry, just like IBV. Therefore we wanted to see what the consequences would be to induction of the IBV-specific immune response after exposure to IBDV. We measured the number of B cells after IBDV exposure followed by exposure to an IBV

59

field strain several days later in order to measure how these immunosuppressive viruses affected the induction of an IBV-specific immune response. A significant reduction in the number of B cells in the Harderian glands (64 percent) was observed when comparing na誰ve controls (in this case chickens not previously exposed to IBDV) with IBDV-pretreated birds nine days after IBV exposure. Fourteen days after the IBV challenge, the IBDV-induced B cell decrease in the Harderian glands had mostly recovered; only a reduction in B cells of 14 percent remained. A similar observation was made for CD4+ T cells in the Harderian glands in that the greatest decrease (63 percent) was observed nine 60 days after IBV challenge in CAV-infected chickens, and this CD4+ T cell decrease had recovered to some extent on day 14 after the IBV challenge. The changes in CD4+ T helper cells were similar to the effect seen on cytotoxic CD8+ T cells.

A more remote mucosal tissue, the cecal tonsils located in the intestinal tract, underwent a similar decline in B cells (80 percent) and T cells (CD4+ and CD8+, both 70 percent) nine days after the IBV challenge. This data is consistent with a role of immunosuppressive viruses on the avian immune response to IBV. In order to further confirm this we measured the number of plasma cells that were secreting IBV-specific IgA antibodies in Harderian

glands and cecal tonsils. The Harderian glands displayed a significant decrease in IBV-specific IgAsecreting B cells after IBDV treatment nine days after challenge with IBV. This number recovered on day 14 after the IBV challenge. In the cecal tonsils, we observed a delay and a lower magnitude of the IgA response compared to the response in the Harderian glands.

It can be concluded from these studies that pre-exposure to the immunosuppressive viruses IBDV and CAV reduced B, T helper and cytotoxic T cells in Harderian glands and cecal tonsils in the subsequent immune response to IBV. The immunosuppressive viruses slow down the kinetics of and lower the magnitude of the mucosal IBV response, contributing to the persistence of IBV in poultry flocks and very likely to the persistence of other avian pathogens.

Variant Strains Live-attenuated IBV vaccines are extensively used to protect chicken flocks from IBV infections.

The four commercially available live-attenuated Arkansas serotype IBV vaccines were all derived from the attenuated Ark Delmarva poultry Industries (ArkDPI) IBV strain. These vaccines are initially passaged 50 times through eggs to attenuate the virus, and then handed over to

vaccine companies, which further passage the virus through eggs.

These commercial Ark-serotype live vaccines display an increased persistence in flocks compared to other IBV serotypes and also contain small subpopulations with changes in their spike gene sequence. These minor variations in the S1 portion of the spike protein define the subpopulations present in the vaccines that are rapidly selected for when applied to chickens, suggesting these mutations in S1 have advantages over other IBV ArkDPI vaccine variants in the chicken host. The host-selected vaccine S1-based subpopulations are more similar in sequence to the virulent ArkDPI parental strain, from which these vaccines were originally derived, than to the S1 sequence present in the predominant vaccine population.

This host selection was not observed in other IBV serotype vaccines, such as Massachusetts or DE072. The different ArkDPI vaccines tested displayed differences in proportions of subpopulations that replicate efficiently in chickens. The presence of a higher proportion of S1 variants in the vaccine that were selected in the chicken resulted mostly in higher viral loads and increased tracheal lesions and higher immune responses, although exceptions were observed. The presence of specific S1 variants in the live-attenuated IBV vaccines

may be important for induction of IBV-specific immunity and may contribute to persistence of the vaccine in the host.

The S1 sequence variant of the spike protein of IBV that persisted in chickens after vaccinations and that resembled the non-attenuated parent sequence of the IBV ArkDPI vaccine strain was inserted into a replication-incompetent adenovirus vector serotype 5 (Ad5). Ad5 is a common cold virus, and some of its early genes have been removed to make it replication-incompetent. The S1 sequence variant inserted into the Ad5 vector was named component 2 (C2). A single ocular administration of Ad5 vector-expressing C2 increased IBV-specific IgA and IgG antibodies to IBV in plasma, IBV-neutralizing antibody levels, and circulating IBV specific B cells. Lymphocytes from

Ad5-C2-immunized chickens, when stimulated in vitro with LPS (LPS activates B cells and stimulates B cell division) secreted IBV-specific antibodies.

The plasma IgG response to the whole IBV virus after Ad5-C2 immunization could be divided into three groups: high, medium, and low responders.

More detailed analyses of these antibody responses were performed using the above-outlined 17 amino acid long, overlapping peptide array covering the S1 sequence. The high responder group contained highly cross-reactive IgG antibodies.

The medium IgG group recognized six B-cell epitopes. As noted earlier, a B-cell epitope is the part of the S1 protein that is recognized by antibodies after vaccination with IBV, and by using overlapping peptides covering the S1 sequence we precisely determined the locations of these sites. The IgG antibodies in the medium IBV response group had a weak response to three of the six recognized Bcell epitopes. The low responder group recognized only two peptides of the S1 sequence.

Going from low to high IgG responder groups, the IgA antibodies in these groups recognized two to four peptides in the host attachment domain of the S1 sequence. An additional cluster of IgAantibody-recognized peptides was located down from the host attachment domain towards the carboxy-terminus of the protein. The number of

peptides recognized in this cluster by IgA increased with decreasing IgG responses to the whole virus.

This observation is consistent with a less-focused humoral IgA response, possibly due to limited antigen exposure by the somewhat low titer of Ad5-C2 available.

Conclusion Persistence of the Arkansas serotype of IBV remains a problem in the poultry industry, because the control of IBV is a complex problem that involves many variables. These variables include the variant subpopulation of the live-attenuated ArkDPI IBV vaccine; the continuous changing nature of this RNA virus in the field, enabling immune escape; the presence of immunosuppressive viruses that hamper induction of protective immunity; and our limited understanding of the role of cell-mediated versus humoral immunity on the control of this virus, as well as the role of systemic versus mucosal immunity in protection against this virus.

Despite the complexity of this problem, progress is being made and hopefully will lead to the design of a highly cross-protective IBV vaccine in the future.

61

i

s

s

u

e

s

Protecting Animals and People New Approach to Low-Cost Vaccinations

by Bernhard Kaltenboeck

62

When people receive a vaccine, it usually means one thing: they are trying to build up antibodies to avoid a specific disease. For centuries, this approach has worked to prevent the spread of or even eliminate many diseases, including such past medical horrors as polio and tetanus. Unfortunately, antibodies are insufficient in preventing many diseases.

Some pathogens are present primarily inside cells. One example is a virus that requires living cells for its own growth inside these cells. Other examples are bacteria or even parasites that enter the inside of cells to grow or hide from the antibody immune response. There are also noninfectious conditions such as cancer, in which cells contain proteins that are not normally present. Antibodies are ineffective for protection or cure in these situations. What is needed is a cellular immune response that can remove these diseased cells.

To achieve that goal, my research associates, Erfan Chowdhury and Yihang Li, and I detoured from tradition. Typically, large doses of antigen (the substance that the immune system recognizes as foreign) are given in a vaccine, since that means more antibodies against these antigens. Instead, we drastically lowered the dose—about 10,000-fold less compared to traditional vaccines. This created a T-cell response, which is exactly what is needed for intracellular diseases. T cells are lymphocytes, a type of circulating white blood cells that are the drivers of the cellular immune response. Such a response can serve as a preventive measure or as a therapeutic option against chronic infections.

Further, the approach uses only short, synthetic protein fragments, or peptides, from the disease target of interest. These fragments are derived from the amino acid sequences of key proteins related to the disease. Preferably, the peptides are about 20 amino acids in length. By overlapping the peptide sequences, all possible 8-10 amino acid segments from the target protein can be presented to the T cells.

Current approaches to create a T-cell response involve using actual pathogens (typically weakened or killed) or whole proteins in the vaccine formulation. By using synthetic peptide antigens combined with a synthetic adjuvant, fully synthetic vaccines

can be produced. Thus, the difficulties of manufacturing using chicken embryo or cell culture methods can be avoided, and the safety concerns associated with biologically produced vaccines can also be alleviated. By creating a fully synthetic vaccine, our platform should prove to be not only safer but also much less expensive.

Numerous different peptides, in fact hundreds or even thousands of them, can be incorporated into a single formulation because of the extremely low antigen dosage and the low cost of production. This provides broad coverage and allows for targeting of multiple proteins, including proteins

from multiple pathogens. Further, multiple variant sequences of a pathogen can be included. This enables both extremely rapid adaptation of a vaccine to antigenic mutations (drift and shift) and potentially universal vaccines against rapidly changing pathogens. (See Figure 1.)

Generally speaking, diseases that currently do not have a vaccine or have vaccines utilizing attenuated live pathogens are the best-suited targets for this platform. Infectious diseases, cancer, and autoimmune diseases can all potentially be treated.

Preventative or therapeutic care can be given by this platform, depending on the disease target.

Vaccine formulations for pathogens with small genomes, including many viruses, could be made up of overlapping peptides comprising the complete set of viral proteins (proteome). Such vaccines could be produced for testing almost immediately.

For more complex pathogens and diseases, such as bacterial infections or cancer, a vaccine could be based on key protective proteins. Typically, further research would be needed to determine the ideal protein targets. However, if such protective proteins have already been identified, formulations could again be finalized quickly.

Other features of our vaccine platform include the ability, first, to tune formulations to preferentially induce a protective Th1 response that

63

produces interferon-gamma versus other types of immune responses that are less protective or inflammatory (e.g., Th2 or Th17). The vaccine platform also generates an immune response during the window of maternal immunity, which prevents development of immunity if live-attenuated vaccines are used. This is potentially beneficial for diseases such as those caused by canine parvovirus.

Finally, the vaccine platform differentiates infected from vaccinated animals.

64

Fig. 1. A comparison of vaccines.

The pathway to development of the low-dose T-cell vaccine platform shows the serendipitous nature of science and the unpredictable benefits that basic science may have. My work as a dairy cattle practitioner before entering a scientific career led me to recognize that intracellular Chlamydia bacteria infect virtually all animals in a livestock herd. A protective immune response against these bacteria requires Th1 cells. Since no vaccine platform technology existed for such a vaccine, my

Auburn associates and I set out to develop one.

Using DNA-based vaccination of mice, we found five highly protective proteins of Chlamydia abortus among all 981 proteins of this pathogen. Then we turned around and used these five proteins for vaccination to test and optimize our vaccine platform. Figure 2 shows the protection afforded by peptides derived from just these five proteins in a mouse model.

Twenty C3H/HeJ mice (Toll-4 receptordeficient LPS non-responders) were vaccinated with 249 overlapping 20-mer peptides derived from the five most protective C. abortus proteins to generate the required anti-chlamydial Th1 immunity. Protection mediated by the Auburn low-dose vaccine (0.2 pg each peptide) is shown in enhanced survival (left) and lower body weight loss (right) after intranasal challenge with 108 C. abortus bacteria (P<0.01).

The list of diseases that could benefit from this approach reads like a whoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s who of WHO (the World Health Organization): malaria, tuberculosis, HIV, dengue fever, and cancer. Numerous commercially significant animal diseases are also candidates. Significant further development and testing is needed to advance this technology to the market, particularly for so many targets. To assist with that, the Office of Technology Transfer has

begun marketing the technology to major human and animal health companies. Nonprofit partnerships will also be sought to seek development pathways for humanitarian targets such as malaria.

The projected low cost of the vaccine opens doors for use of the platform against diseases in developing countries.

Further, given the relative simplicity of the formulations, multiple start-up companies could also be formed. Two are currently being contemplated: one for a viral infection that affects domestic swine, and another for the bacterium Chlamydia, my primary research interest. Long associated with being a sexually transmitted disease, Chlamydia has numerous species that produce chronic infections in humans and animals, including cattle. Most chlamydial infections do not cause overt disease, but nevertheless negatively influence important production traits such as fertility and milk production. The basic science approach to chlamydial infections has now produced the knowledge and methods that allow us to put all the pieces of the puzzle together.

We have recently shown that these chlamydial infections, which every livestock animal experiences, also profoundly reduce growth rates of young animals. We think that growth suppression of chlamydiae by antibiotics is a major reason why

65 Fig. 2. Comparison of the novel vaccination platform with traditional vaccination methods.

antibiotics work as growth promoters, and believe that our vaccination approach may have the same effect. About 80 percent of all antibiotics are used worldwide as growth-promoting feed additives, with the well-known side effect that they increase antibiotic resistance of all bacteria. Therefore, our vaccine against chlamydiae may replace antibiotics as a growth promoter and contribute to better control of antibiotic resistance in all bacteria.

Additional internal development of this technology is planned over the near future, including optimizing the vaccine formulations, studying different diseases, and performing tests in different animal species, including chickens, swine, and cattle. If the public benefit possibilities for this technology can be realized for even just a handful of the identified targets, the impact on how we prevent and treat infectious diseases may be remarkable.

Research Meets Education and Training

66

by Karen Hunley

The Lambert-Powell Meats Lab

W

ith its multiple processing rooms, stateof-the-art equipment, and stadium-style classroom, the Lambert-Powell Meats Laboratory at Auburn University is ideal for discovering the best ways to process beef and pork and turn these into nutritious, safe food. And we can all agree that the steak, hamburger, bacon—whatever meat product you’re eating—also needs to taste good, says lab manager Barney Wilborn.

Established in 2004, the Lambert-Powell Meats Lab is used for faculty and graduate student research, animal science student education, as well as training for U.S. Department of Agriculture personnel and others in the industry. It also sells processed beef and pork to the general public in its Retail Sales Room.

The lab is named after Billy Powell and Ernest Lambert. Powell is the current president of the Alabama Cattlemen’s Association, and Lambert was a former president.

Regulated by the state’s meat-inspection pro-

gram, the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries, the lab must meet necessary requirements in areas such as sanitation, food safety, biosecurity, and animal welfare. The Lambert-Powell Meats Lab, and all smaller meat plants inspected by state programs, comply with the same rules and regulations as larger plants that are inspected by the USDA. Meat lab research focuses heavily on carcass yield and composition, Wilborn says. Carcasses are composed of bone, fat, and muscle—the muscle is the valuable part for food and is referred to as yield.

The USDA defines yield as “the percent of closely trimmed, boneless retail cuts from the round, loin, rib, and chuck.”

“An animal that eats the same amount of feed as its counterparts but converts more of that energy into fat is not as valuable,” Wilborn explains. “Our job as animal scientists is to find breeds of animals and particular lines within breeds that make the most efficient use of resources.”

The way cattle and hogs are fed also impacts carcass yield significantly, so the meat lab looks at how to feed them in order to increase yield. Meat quality—tenderness, juiciness, flavor—is also important, Wilborn says. You can’t overlook taste just because a particular animal might have a good yield, or efficiency.

“When we find a line of pig that has better feed 67 efficiency, we want to know what it tastes like,” he adds. “A component is almost always what does feed efficiency mean for meat quality?”

Even when a research project does not focus specifically on yield and quality, the meat lab almost always investigates these two factors to some degree. For example, grains used in biofuel or spirit production are often fed to livestock after the fermentation and distillation process—they are “spent grains” that still have substantial nutritional value for the animals. But since some of the grains may be new to either the biofuel or spirit industry, meat scientists need to understand how the

68

Temple Grandin (right) tours the Lambert-Powell Meats Lab with Barney Wilborn (right) and Wayne Greene, chair of the Department of Animal Sciences.

grains will affect “the growth of the animal and the resulting effects on carcass yield and quality,” Wilborn explains.

Keeping meat processing as safe as possible is also a major research component. Corporations that sell meat to the public have high standards for

meat safety, and those standards have increased as the public has gained access to a wealth of online information about meat processing.

“The level of accountability in the food industry is at an unprecedented level,” Wilborn says.

“Corporations used to be held in check by govern-

ment, but today most of them are held by their customers to much higher standards than what USDA regulates.”

Factors such as what temperatures are appropriate to cook meat, how fast it should be cooked, and what added ingredients make a meat product safer are investigated at the meat lab, and that information is made available to the industry.

The university serves as an “unbiased provider of scientific information” to meat-processing plants of all sizes, Wilborn says. And while this is a benefit to all meat processors, the lab’s research especially benefits smaller processors rather than larger processors, who are able to conduct most of their own research and subsequent development.

“We are a tiny part of the food system, but you never know what piece of information is going to be life-changing for some corporation,” Wilborn adds.

For instance, a single piece of equipment that would enhance safety but costs hundreds of thousands of dollars can be justified at a large plant that processes up to 5,000 head of cattle a day, but budgets are much tighter at smaller plants that process only 10 head a day. Those are the processors that can really benefit from the lab’s research into more feasible safety and quality-control measures.

Another research focus is humane handling of animals at meat-processing plants. All plants are

required to meet animal welfare standards, but larger ones are able to construct more elaborate, state-of-the art facilities that meet the criteria touted by Temple Grandin, renowned animal welfare activist and consultant to livestock farms and slaughterhouses. Her research into animal behavior has set the standard on modifying facilities and livestock-handling techniques to reduce stress on animals.

But operators of small plants can’t fly in Grandin to design their facilities, Wilborn says. So when the meat lab successfully uses her ideas to improve its own facilities, they can then make that information available to the industry. For instance, the lab recent carried out a relatively simple modification to make hogs more comfortable— simply widening its alleys so the hogs don’t have to line up single-file, which they dislike. Wilborn says they are now trying to collect data from this project and get it published.

Research and education are tied closely together in such an interactive, hands-on facility. In addition to all the processing rooms and equipment, the two stadium-style classrooms—one with a demonstration kitchen—make the meat lab ideal for students working toward animal science degrees. Students participate in research activities related to meat quality and food safety and are involved in every

step of meat processing from humanely harvesting the animals to cutting the meat for retail sale. Conferences for cattle producers and youth Extension activities are also held at the lab.

Some of that meat doesn’t go far once it has been prepared for purchase—just to the lab’s Retail Sales Room, which is open from 2 to 5 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Friday.

It sells items such as ground beef, steak, bacon, sausage, eggs, and, on occasion, smoked brisket and ham.

Wilborn and his staff collaborate with other animal science facilities to first carry out research and education, and then to sell the animal products. It receives beef cattle from the Beef Teaching Unit, swine typically from the Swine Research and Education Center, and eggs from the poultry unit. While the lab does have two butchers and two managers on staff full-time, the graduate and undergraduate students conduct the bulk of the processing activities.

69

Fruits of Labor

By Jay Spiers 70

Identifying ways to enhance fruit production in the Southeast

I

t is an encouraging and exciting time to be researching and teaching fruit production.

Overall, Alabama seems to be headed in the right direction in this area, and I believe the 2012 census data will show a substantial increase in acreage devoted to fruit production. There are at least twice as many students enrolled in the fruit and vegetable curriculum of horticulture as compared to five years ago, and it is encouraging to see more students interested in this field. However, I am passionate about finding ways to further enhance fruit production systems in Alabama and throughout the Southeast.

There is much interest in locally grown fruits and vegetables right now due to the highly publicized health benefits of consuming fresh fruit and vegetables, and marketing campaigns such as the “Buy Fresh, Buy Local” campaign. Also, thanks to the Farmers Market Authority (http://www.fma.alabama.gov/) and the tireless work of Don Wambles, director of the Farmers Market Authority, there are more local markets available for Alabama fruit

and vegetable growers to sell their produce than in years past. Farmers’ markets are vitally important for our fruit industries, as fruit production in Alabama consists primarily of small acreage farms that sell directly to consumers.

Much of our current fruit production research is a continuation of the efforts of current and previous Auburn researchers. Dr. Joe Norton had a very productive breeding program that resulted in several plum, watermelon, and chestnut cultivars that continue to perform well today. He was also instrumental in introducing new plant material from China, including kiwifruit, Satsuma, and chestnut selections. This plant material has been further evaluated and developed by Dr. Billy Dozier and others (particularly Jim Pitts, director of the Chilton Research and Extension Center) with the hope of selecting cultivars that perform well in our environment.

The climate in the southeastern U.S. is conducive for production of many different fruit crops,

but there are obstacles. We can’t control the weather, but matching the cultivar/variety with the proper growing site is the next best thing. Our current research is focused on identifying favorable cultivars for production in the Southeast and optimizing production practices so current and developing industries can be sustainable.

Auburn researchers are conducting research on 71 many different fruit and nut crops, including apple, banana, blackberry, blueberry, chestnut, citrus, grape, fig, kiwifruit, muscadine, peach, pear, pecan, persimmon, plum, pomegranate, strawberry, and more. This particular article focuses on the current research of three very different fruit crops that I expect to increase in production in Alabama: Satsuma, blueberry, and kiwifruit.

Alabama is not often thought of as a citrusproducing state. However, Alabama was once the top U.S. producer of Satsuma mandarins, and the Gulf Coast of Alabama was known for Satsuma production. Blueberries are one of the few fruit crops that

are native to North America, and the list of reported health benefits of consuming fresh blueberries seems to get longer every day. The blueberry industry in the U.S. has increased substantially over the past 10 to 20 years, and this industry is still on the rise, particularly in Alabama.

Then there is kiwifruit—not (yet!) thought of as being tied to the South. Kiwifruit is a deciduous 72 vine that is native to China in regions with a similar climate (and latitude) to Alabama. Similar to blueberries, there is a wealth of information detailing the health benefits of kiwifruit and hailing kiwifruit as one of the “super fruits.” Currently, there is no substantial commercial kiwifruit production in the Southeast. Acreage devoted to Satsuma and blueberry production has increased substantially in the past five years, and kiwifruit cultivars that perform well in our climate have just recently been released.

Satsuma Mandarin Research Satsuma (Citrus unshiu Marc.) is a global citrus crop, introduced to the U.S. from Japan in the late

1800s. Most people are probably familiar with Satsumas, but (with a touch of bias) they are the best tasting/eating citrus. They are like candy to a 4 year old! Satsumas are enjoyed by all age groups, as they are easy to peel and seedless, or nearly seedless. Hence, Satsumas earned their nickname “kid-glove orange.”

The Gulf Coast Satsuma industry dates back to the early 1900s, with 1,616,313 Satsuma trees reported for Alabama in 1914-1915. Because of periodic devastation by severe freezes, the industry declined rapidly after the 1920s. We do not have accurate data for the acreage in Alabama today, but it is somewhere between 200-400 acres, up from just over 100 acres surveyed in 2005.

Of the edible citrus varieties, only kumquat is more cold-hardy than Satsuma. Mature trees grafted onto trifoliate orange rootstock can survive temperatures down to -10 degrees C (14 degrees F) during winter. The freeze risk has been measurably reduced in the last two decades by irrigation technology and “high tunnel”

greenhouse production for production north of Montgomery, Alabama.

Owari is a late-season Satsuma cultivar that accounts for the majority of Satsumas produced in Alabama. While earlier ripening cultivars have been introduced on the Gulf Coast, their acceptance has been limited because of inferior quality.

Dr. Billy Dozier observed excellent-quality fruit in very early-ripening cultivars of Satsumas in the Hubei province of China, and these cultivars, which became available for planting in the U.S. in 2008, may provide better quality in the early season. They also potentially offer improved cold acclimation, which would substantially decrease the risk of freezing and bolster industry sustainability. These cultivars are currently being evaluated at the Gulf Coast Research and Extension Center (GCREC), in Fairhope, Alabama, and the Wiregrass Research and Extension Center (WREC), in Headland, Alabama. We are evaluating these new selections for the third season. There appear to be several promising early and mid-season cultivars. In fact, most of the selections ripen earlier than Owari and have good fruit quality and yield for young trees.

Additional research is underway at WREC to determine fertility regimes to reduce the occurrence of alternate bearing. High yields can stress trees and induce a pattern of alternate

bearing, whereby heavy and light crops are produced in alternate years. Alternate bearing can reduce fruit quality and result in an inconsistent supply of fruit, which must be overcome for successful marketing through commercial outlets.

Also, frequent fertilizer applications may reduce alternate bearing tendencies.

We have recently established a plant density study utilizing the dwarfing trifoliate orange rootstock Flying Dragon in an effort to maximize production on a per acre basis and allow for efficient harvesting. We are excited about this study, as using a dwarfing rootstock can potentially save production costs, primarily by avoiding the use of ladders during harvesting.

Satsumas are much more productive on the standard trifoliate orange Rubidoux rootstock on a per tree basis, averaging about 350 lbs/tree for Owari when mature. Production for mature Owari Satsumas on Flying Dragon has averaged 120-140 lbs/tree at the Gulf Coast Research and Extension Center. However, if you can get this lower yield with three to four times greater trees per acre, then it is expected that profitability will increase due to cost savings during harvest.

In addition, pest management and sprinkler irrigation for freeze protection may be enhanced due to better spray coverage.

Inadequate peel-color development is a problem Satsuma growers have dealt with for many years. In large citrus-growing states, ethylene gas is used to â&#x20AC;&#x153;degreenâ&#x20AC;? fruit in large degreening rooms. The Satsuma industry in Alabama is quite small compared to Florida and California, and degreening rooms may not presently be feasible for growers. To alleviate this problem, we have explored promising methods to degreen postharvest fruit utilizing the plant growth regulator, ethephon. We will repeat this study again to ensure results, but ethephon has been quite effective as a postharvest dip for degreening Satsumas in our initial studies.

Blueberry Research A major factor limiting the expansion of the commercial blueberry industry is the availability of sites with suitable soil and moisture characteristics. Blueberry has strict soil requirements for satisfactory growth, and this is reflected in the soilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s establishment and maintenance costs. Although blueberries can be grown on more typical mineral soils (i.e., higher native pH, lower organic matter), the soil inputs required to maintain productivity are extensive.

We have been working with collaborators from the University of Florida and Oregon State University to utilize the tree-like native blueberry

73

species, sparkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum, also known as farkleberry or winter huckleberry) to develop blueberry production systems that are suitable for commercial production with less costly soil amendments.

Native sparkleberry plants have been found as far north as Indiana and ranging from Virginia to Nebraska, and south from Florida to Texas. Within this range, plants appear to adapt to many different soil characteristics. Sparkleberry tolerates much higher pH soils than highbush blueberries and grows well on mineral soils with low organic mat-

ter (< 2 percent). Also, the tree-like growth habit might facilitate mechanical harvesting. Cultivated blueberry plants are multi-trunked, and as much as 30 percent of fruit is lost in the center of the canopy during mechanical harvest.

The overall project is focused on breeding desirable traits of sparkleberry into Southern highbush blueberry and utilizing sparkleberry as a rootstock for cultivated blueberry production. The research performed by Auburn has focused on sparkleberry rootstock selection, asexual propagation of sparkleberry, and the performance of Southern highbush blueberry grafted onto sparkleberry and grown in soil amended with pine bark or non-amended soil.

The research plot comparing Southern highbush 74 blueberries grafted onto sparkleberry rootstock versus Southern highbush grown on its own roots is located at the Gulf Coast Research and Extension Center. Malcolm Pegues, director of GCREC, and Brian Wilkins, research associate IV, have been instrumental in the implementation and evaluation of this research project.

The plants are relatively young, and we have not harvested the fruit yet, but we will test yields by mechanically harvesting plots. Dr. Paul Lyrene, professor emeritus at the University of Florida, is also evaluating seedlings from the breeding program at the GCREC to determine favorable

cultivars for this region. Grafting blueberries might seem far-fetched, as blueberries do quite well on their own roots in favorable growing conditions.

However, production costs can be high for blueberries, especially costs associated with hand harvest, and improving mechanical harvesting techniques is vitally important as labor costs and labor shortages are prevalent concerns.

We are also evaluating rabbiteye blueberry (V. ashei) cultivars at the North Alabama Horticultural Research Center (NAHRC) in Cullman, Alabama, with Arnold Caylor, director of the AHRC, and at the Wiregrass Research and Extension Center with Larry Wells, director of the WREC. Dr. Elina Coneva, associate professor, and Dr. Jeff Sibley, professor, of horticulture at Auburn, have evaluated bloom periods, harvest times, fruit quality, and yield for the rabbiteye planting at the NAHRC for several years.

The Wiregrass Blueberry Growers Association has been expanding blueberry production in southeast Alabama, and our rabbiteye cultivar study was included at WREC to determine favorable cultivars in this region and their performance on relatively high pH soils. Thus far, all 15 of the rabbiteye blueberry cultivars are thriving (somewhat unfortunately), likely due to the particular fertilizer we are using. Therefore,

we are shifting the fertilizer regime to test plant performance in response to fertilizer and high soil pH.

Kiwifruit Research Three new kiwifruit cultivars (AU Golden Dragon, AU Golden Sunshine, and AU Fitzgerald) have been developed by Auburn University and have great potential for commercial and home garden production in the Southeast. Golden Dragon and Golden Sunshine (Actinidia chinensis Planch.) are new, early-ripening golden kiwifruit cultivars that have been evaluated in central Alabama since 1995. Golden flesh kiwifruit (A. chinensis) has a smooth skin (very little pubescence) and generally tastes sweeter, with low to marginal acidity, compared to green-fleshed kiwifruit (A. deliciosa).

Golden Dragon blooms the earliest (typically the first week in April) and becomes ripe around late August in central Alabama, whereas Golden Sunshine blooms in late April to early May and ripens in early to mid-September. Because of the early bloom period of Golden Dragon, spring frosts would be a concern in regions where April freezes occur frequently. Golden Dragon is rounder in appearance than Golden Sunshine, which has an elliptical shape preferable for packaging and slicing.

Both can be enjoyed picked straight from the vine or ripened postharvest.

We have conducted postharvest storage studies, and the cold-storage life of these cultivars is comparable to the current industry standard Hort 16A (Zespri速 Gold). An important thing to note is that kiwifruit are dioecious, meaning they have separate female and male plants. Hence, a male pollinizer is necessary for fruit development. Based on corresponding bloom periods with female cultivars, Hortkiwi Meteor is suggested as the pollinizer for AU Golden Dragon, and AU Tiger is used as the pollinizer for AU Golden Sunshine.

AU Fitzgerald is a green-fleshed female cultivar that has performed well in central and south Alabama. Hayward kiwifruit is the major kiwifruit

cultivar produced worldwide, and if you have eaten kiwifruit, this is most likely what you consumed.

Hayward is a prolific fruiting cultivar and performs exceptionally in adapted environments, but the chilling requirement is too high for areas along the Gulf Coast and most likely central Alabama. AU Fitzgerald was released from Auburn University because it has a lower chilling-hour requirement that allows for production in warmer environments.

Interestingly, Mrs. A. A. (Gracie) Fitzgerald of Summerdale in Baldwin County, Alabama, purchased kiwifruit from a local chain store in the mid 1970s and planted some seed from the fruit. After several years, she ended up with one female plant and one male plant that bloomed together, were very productive, and matured a crop of quality fruit

each season. Mrs. Fitzgerald collaborated with Auburn University faculty, particularly Dr. Dozier, to develop and eventually patent these cultivars. Thus, the name AU Fitzgerald was given to the female plant, and the male plant is named AU Arthur for her husband.

The main goal of our kiwifruit research program is to optimize production of these cultivars.

Successful pollination is crucial for fruit set and fruit size, and many commercial growers (in New Zealand, Italy, Chile, and California) apply supplemental pollen to improve pollination. Kiwifruit pollen is quite expensive, so we are determining the effective pollination period for these kiwifruit cultivars so that efforts to enhance pollination can 75 be targeted.

Also, AU Golden Dragon and particularly AU Golden Sunshine are prolific fruiting cultivars, often producing an excess of fruit that results in too many small, unmarketable fruit. Golden Sunshine will produce more marketable fruit when fruit are thinned at an early stage of fruit development.

Thus far, Golden Dragon has not benefited from fruit-thinning practices. We are now evaluating the effectiveness of flower bud removal as a cultural practice to increase marketable yields.

Since we have primarily evaluated the kiwifruit cultivars only in central Alabama at the Chilton

76

Research and Extension Center (CREC), we have recently established replicated plots at the Gulf Coast Research and Extension Center; Brewton Agricultural Research Unit in Brewton, Alabama; Nacogdoches, Texas (Stephen F. Austin University); Stone County, Mississippi (USDA); and Virginia Beach, Virginia (Virginia Tech University). These research plantings will allow us to observe performance in different regions with varying climates that may affect bloom periods and subsequent pollination and performance.

It is anticipated that these new cultivars will perform well for home and commercial production in similar environments and allow for a lengthy harvest period. Kiwifruit, particularly gold-fleshed kiwifruit, has great potential for commercial production in the Southeast. Growing in areas with proper chilling requirements and low frost risk are essential for industry success.

The introduction of this highly nutritious fruit into the USDA’s Farm-to-School program (which connects schools with local farms with the aim of providing healthy, nutritious food) could also enhance its commercial success as well as benefit schoolchildren. Kiwifruit is produced during the school year, in the fall, and has a long storage life.

Promoted as one of the “super fruits,” it is an excellent source of dietary phytonutrients, including

vitamin C, vitamin E, beta-carotene, and polyphenols. Introducing this fruit to schools in the Southeast aligns with the USDA’s goal of reducing childhood obesity.

There is a lot of untapped potential for these three fruit crops in Alabama. Satsuma production once had a substantial impact on Alabama’s economy. The Gulf Coast region and southeast Alabama are great environments for Satsuma production—cool enough in the fall and winter for fruit to develop excellent flavor and for Satsuma trees to properly go dormant, yet typically not too cold to damage plants.

I encourage people to introduce Satsumas to their families, especially their kids. Satsumas are a healthy snack. Kids usually love blueberries, too, and the health benefits of blueberries are well documented. Local blueberries are readily available at farmers’ markets in the summertime. We hope that local blueberries will become more prevalent at grocery stores in the near future.

Gold kiwifruit are hard to find in local grocery stores, and many people in the South are not very familiar with kiwifruit, especially Alabama-grown kiwifruit. Worldwide, gold kiwifruit production has suffered recently because of a devastating disease, Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidia (Psa). However, the U.S. does not have this disease, and there are

quarantines in place to prevent it from spreading to this country, which means there is potential for commercial gold kiwifruit production in this country. We hope to see locally grown kiwifruit in the Southeast in the near future and share this delicious, healthy fruit with our families.

Other research areas I feel strongly that Satsuma, kiwifruit, and blueberry production have a place in the South and that research is warranted to enhance production of these crops. However, there are many other fruit crops and cultivars that have untapped potential for production in Alabama. Dr. Coneva, for example, is evaluating bunch grapes and Vitis vinifera hybrids that may perform well in our climate; some are suited for fresh consumption, and others are preferable for processing.

We have recently established research plots at the Gulf Coast and Chilton centers to determine recommended pomegranate cultivars for these regions. Pomegranates are adapted to a drier climate, and many cultivars may suffer in production because of frequent rainfall, high humidity, and subsequent pathogen pressure.

However, pomegranates are a common backyard crop in the South, and there are hundreds of cultivars with considerable variation in

productivity, seediness, color, tartness, sweetness, and size. Fall 2013 will be the first harvest for these research plots, and we are excited to evaluate fruit quality.

Also, Asian persimmons (Diospyros kaki) are an under-utilized fruit that performs well in central and south Alabama. Persimmons seem to have a negative stigma in the South, likely because of negative experiences biting into the astringent native persimmon (Diospyros virginiana). Many of us have been tricked into trying the native persimmon, and the resultant dry, puckeringmouth feel is still fresh on our minds. The nonastringent Asian persimmons, which are flatter in shape, are deliciously sweet and can be enjoyed 77 while still firm. They are one of the easier fruit trees to grow in the South. We have a cultivar trial at the Chilton Research and Extension Center, and there are several cultivars that perform well for early-, mid-, and late-season production when grafted onto native persimmon.

We will continue to work hard to find ways to enhance fruit production systems in Alabama and the entire Southeast. To aid in this effort, I hope southern consumers keep the “Buy Fresh, Buy Local” movement in full swing by continuing to support local fruit and vegetable production.

i

n

f

o

c

u

s

Vegetable Trials Guide Alabama Growers

by Joe Kemble

78

Almost all the vegetables in Alabama are produced for the fresh market—including farmer’s markets, community-supported agriculture operations, grocers, and restaurateurs who covet the locally grown produce. Thanks to those enthusiastic buyers, many small Alabama growers are able to make a livable wage.

However, the fresh market was not always strong in Alabama. Before 1975, Alabama growers produced for processors, including potatoes for the chip market. Labor was cheap, and Alabama’s relatively small acreage could produce enough to be competitive in the wholesale market. Prior to the mid-1970s, most of Alabama produce was destined for the wholesale market. Labor costs went up, though, and larger farms in the Midwest and West were able to more economically serve processors.

Today, the emphasis is on retail: Between 85 to 90 percent of Alabama produce goes to fresh markets.

Key to the success of small growers—by U.S. Department of Agriculture standards all Alabama

vegetable farms are considered small—is growing plants that thrive in their specific soils and climate.

Auburn has conducted vegetable trials, or research that tests the success of seeds under specific conditions, for decades. Seeds are donated by or solicited from seed companies and planted under standard, recommended commercial practices at Alabama Cooperative Extension System research centers, including E. V. Smith Research Center in Shorter, Brewton Agriculture Research Unit, and Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center in Crossville. Two rounds of testing—one for warmseason crops and one for cool-season planting— are conducted each year.

Information about planting dates, weather conditions, fertilization, irrigation, pests, and overall success is collected, and varieties are rated from 1 to 5, according to their performance. The results are published in the annual Southeastern United States Vegetable Crop Handbook. (Both hard copies and downloadable versions are available for free via county extension offices.) Information about performance is also provided to the seed companies, though it is the top performers that matter the most to Alabama growers. Recommendations about which varieties are likely to thrive in Alabama give growers an edge. Auburn can afford to make a mistake. Growers can’t.

Among the almost 50 vegetable crops that are grown throughout the state, peppers, tomatoes, leafy greens (lettuce, collards, etc.), sweet corn, and watermelon are the most economically important vegetable crops in Alabama. New varieties of these crops are tested annually. More and more, Auburn also tests various melons, broccoli, leeks, beets, and other more “boutique” crops.

A new generation of small growers that can benefit from Auburn’s vegetable trials: Young people with backgrounds in business or economics who have inherited family land. Today in Alabama, there are more than 200 vegetable farms between a half-acre and 150 acres in size that supply the more than 250 farmers markets in the state. Young growers can use their business skills and market judgment to make a 100-acre family farm economically viable. The first question they must ask is “will it grow?” The second is “can I make money on it?”

The vegetable trials help them answer both.

The vegetable trials feed other research as well.

Faculty and students are engaged in both applied research—minimizing the amount of fertilizer needed for successful growing, for instance, or performance of specific varieties in no-till plots—to post-harvest laboratory analysis of, say, the lycopene content of specific tomato varieties. (Lycopene is a naturally occurring chemical

that gives tomatoes and watermelons their red color.) And there is no shortage of future topics for research—for instance, the growing prevalence of high-tunnel structures (similar to an elevated greenhouse), which extend the growing season, as well as the need to investigate heirloom varieties, old cultivars that have been saved from generation to generation, which are increasingly popular in fresh markets and restaurants.

Quality rather than quantity is the operative word for Alabama vegetable growers. By taking some of the guesswork out of growing for farmers, Auburn helps them succeed.

79

Joe Kemble checks a tomato during field trial research

80

Growing Practices B y D r . E l i na D. C o n e va a n d E d g a r L .V i n s o n

Investigating Innovative Fruit Crop Production Systems for Local Markets

A

labama is unique in that its principle fruit commodities are marketed almost exclusively through local outlets. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate new specialty fruit crop selections and to assess suitability for the market culture. As the number of farmers’ markets in Alabama has expanded, the demand for locally grown fruit crops has also dramatically increased, outpacing current local supply. One way to meet extended market demand is to diversify fruit crop production by introduction of nontraditional, relatively new, or underutilized fruit crops with high nutritional value and high fruit quality.

Grapes Alabama grape growers are eager to explore grape species as alternatives to traditionally grown muscadine grapes, thereby diversifying their operations and leading to enhanced economic and social sustainability. For instance, the Alabama Wine Trail

offers opportunities for local agritourism. Furthermore, current nutraceutical research has revealed that grapes are a powerful source of phytochemicals and antioxidants and are very beneficial to human health. This breakthrough information has triggered an increased market demand for grapes and processed products. According to a March 2011 report provided by the U.S. Wine Institute, record-high 2010 wine shipments make the U.S. the world’s largest wine-consuming nation. This creates tremendous potential for the industry to attract more traffic by offering a new market product based on the three newly introduced grape species researched at the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station (AAES), Auburn University’s vineyards.

Pierce’s disease (PD) is a serious threat to the cultivation of grapes in the United States, especially in the warmer southern regions. Caused by a xylem-limited bacterium, Xylella fastidiosa, Pierce’s disease in grapes is the major limiting factor for

growing Vitis vinifera, so-called European grapes, in Alabama and the southeastern United States.

Generally, PD infection leads to vine decline, yield loss, and vine death typically occurring within two to three years of infection. Presently, there is no known cure for PD, and management efforts are focused on the development of grape selections that are both resistant to this devastating bacterial disease and achieve effective insect vector control.

Even though PD is endemic in the southeastern U.S., according to a 2009 USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service report, fruit growing acreage data for Alabama shows that grape production ranks third after peaches and blueberries with a total of 467 acres. When compared to the grape acreage a decade ago, this is a 41 percent increase, which is considerable growth. Newly developed grape selections introduced from UC Davis are 87.5 percent Vitis vinifera (European type) and are resistant to PD in greenhouse and field assays

81

82

because they have the PdR1 geneâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;the resistance locus insertedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and can provide an opportunity for expanding production. French-American and American hybrid bunch grapes that are tolerant to PD also can produce substantial crops for the fresh market and for processing, which can add value to the grape production.

Seedless table grape selections are usually a preferred consumer choice in the market place.

Grape breeders have responded to consumer preferences for seedless grapes with the development of numerous improved varieties.

The seedless trait in grapes was originally derived from cultivars of ancient origin such as Thompson Seedless and Black Monukka. Most seedless grapes suitable for the eastern United States are descended from crosses with these two cultivars.

Breeding programs in New York, Ontario, Arkansas, and elsewhere continue to produce seedless selections with improved hardiness and quality. The Division of Agriculture at the University of Arkansas has been breeding table grapes since 1964. The program continues with crossing and selection, and several advanced selections under consideration for release were introduced in Alabama for testing in our environment. The performance of the newly introduced grape selections needs to be studied in

Alabama growing conditions in order to evaluate the overall species and cultivar performance.

Currently, commercial bunch grape production in the Southeast is very limited, and sustainable production systems have not been determined.

Experimental vineyards were established through the AAES with the goal of determining 1) the feasibility of growing Vitis vinifera in Alabama; 2) best-performing French-American and American hybrid bunch grape cultivars; 3) best-performing table grape selections; and 4) best management practices for the newly introduced selections and cultivars. What we discover at the AAES vineyards will help develop proper production system recommendations, vital for establishing a sustainable industry and enhancing the competitiveness of Alabama-grown fruit crops.

Grape Cultivar Research

Our grape-related investigations have included research conducted at three experimental vineyards in the state. Experiment 1 was planted at the Chilton Research and Extension Center in Clanton in 2010 in order to determine the feasibility of growing three of the UC Davisdeveloped, PD-resistant Vitis vinifera grape selections in Alabama and evaluate their production potential. Experiment 2 comprised

eleven PD-tolerant American and FrenchAmerican hybrid bunch grape cultivars, including Black Spanish, Blanc du Bois, Champanel, Conquistador, Cynthiana, Favorite, Lake Emerald, Seyval Blanc, Seyval Blanc grafted on Coudrec 3309 (Seyval Blanc/3309C), Stover, and Villard Blanc, planted at the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center (SMREC) in Crossville, Alabama, in 2008. Experiment 3 encompassed three recently released seedless table grape cultivars from the University of Arkansas breeding program, including Faith (A2412); Joy (A2494); Gratitude (A2505); eight advanced grape selections, A2817, A2245, A2359, A2467, A2574, A2602, A2632, A2786; two previously released seedless cultivars, Mars and Neptune; and two standard cultivars, Conquistador and Stover, which were planted at the North Alabama Horticultural Research Center (NAHRC) in Cullman, Alabama in 2008.

All of the experimental plots utilized a randomized complete block design with four to six replications and two to five single vines per replication to ensure reliable scientific results. Vineyards were maintained according to standard commercial grape-growing practices. During the 2012 season, data were collected to determine an array of cultivar characteristics aiming to assess grapevine

vegetative growth, cropping potential, and fruit quality of tested cultivars and selections.

Results

Our preliminary results from Clanton suggest the PD-resistant V. vinifera selections vary in terms of their vegetative growth, season of ripening, yield potential, and fruit-quality traits. The least vigorously growing selection in 2012 was 502-10, with the lowest number of fruiting clusters per vine.

502-10 ripened very early in the season and produced medium-sized fruit. Selection 501-12 had a very late ripening season, the most vigorous vines, the greatest mean cluster number per vine, and the highest yield per plant with the sweetest fruit.

Our experiment 2 results indicate that Champanel had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while Seyval Blanc had the weakest vine vigor.

Stover had the earliest shoot development, while Champanel and Cynthiana had late shoot development. Stover and Seyval Blanc had early flowering development, while Cynthiana and Lake Emerald flowered late in the season. Seyval Blanc and Seyval Blanc/3309C had early maturity season, while Lake Emerald matured late. Villard Blanc produced the largest yield of 12.7 kg/vine and had the greatest mean cluster weight of 287.1 g. Champanel produced the largest fruit, at 4.8 g.窶気ynthiana

and Lake Emerald had the highest soluble solids content (SSC) with 19.8 percent and 18.8 percent, respectively, while Champanel had the lowest SSC of 13.1 percent at harvest. Blanc du Bois and Stover had the highest pH of 3.58 and 3.49, respectively. It is the sugar/acid ratio that gives many fruits their characteristic flavor and so is an indicator of commercial and organoleptic ripeness. At the beginning of the ripening process the sugar/

83

acid ratio is low, because of low sugar content and high fruit acid content, this makes the fruit taste sour. During the ripening process the fruit acids are degraded, the sugar content increases and the sugar/acid ratio achieves a higher value. Titration is a chemical process used in ascertaining the amount of constituent substance in a sample, e.g. acids, by using a standard counter-active reagent, e.g. an alkali (NaOH). The titratable acidity is expressed as grams of tartaric acid per 100 ml. Once the acid level in a sample has been determined it can be used to find the ratio of sugar to acid.

There were no significant differences in titratable acidity (TA), which ranged from 0.56 to 84 1.36 g/100 ml among cultivars tested. Villard Blanc, Cynthiana, and Black Spanish were the best performing cultivars, combining vigorous vegetative growth, high yields, and good fruit quality at the SMREC. Experiment 3 dealt with seedless table grape cultivars and selections. Joy had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while A2786 had the weakest vine vigor. Stover had the earliest shoot and flower development. Selection A2359 had 3.5 fruiting clusters per shoot, which represents the greatest average fruiting cluster number among all cultivars and selections tested in Experiment 3. Mars and Faith were early ripening and early maturing, while

Conquistador started to develop late in the season.

The highest yielding cultivars and selections recorded were A2574, A2359, Neptune, A2245, and Conquistador, which produced 12.0 kg/vine or higher. Seedless table grape cultivars Gratitude and Neptune had the largest average cluster size of 490 g. Gratitude and A2817 produced the largest grapes of 4.9 g on average. Selections and cultivars under test differed significantly in soluble solid concentration and titratable acidity. Fruit pH level of all studied cultivars and selections ranged from 3.28 to 3.95. Our preliminary results suggest that Neptune and Gratitude were the best performing seedless table grape cultivars based on data on their vegetative growth, cropping potential, and fruit quality.

Our results are very encouraging, and we are excited to observe the vineyard establishment, anticipating higher yields once the vines mature.

The newly developed PD-resistant selections with various origins have the potential to greatly impact the fruit industry in Alabama and the Southeast by providing new specialty fruit crops to the market and broadening the window of economic opportunities to the growers. Due to the inherent high PD pressure in the Southeast, the abundance of efficient native insect vectors, and lack of cultural research, previous attempts to establish a com-

mercial grape production based on Vitis vinifera grapes were not successful in our region. Studies to evaluate the feasibility of growing Vitis vinifera, French-American, and American grape species and cultivars proposed in this project will add an array of fresh and processed grape products to our diets, and this has the potential to greatly impact Alabama’s markets by offering a new market product.

Furthermore, introducing locally grown fresh and processed V. vinifera products—rich in antioxidants and resveratrol, and proven to help prevent cardiovascular diseases, inflammation and aging processes—will contribute to healthier diets for Alabamians. The proposed study is expected to improve the agricultural sustainability of Alabama agriculture and food systems through implementation of advanced technologies that ensure the viability of specialty crop production systems for future generations as well as enhance quality of life by increasing farmers’ profits and offering a healthy food to the customer. Another possible impact could originate from the opportunity to enhance the state’s agritourism industry and aid in the development and promotion of the recently established Alabama Wine Trail.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

85

A

labama is unique in that its principle fruit commodities are marketed almost exclusively through local outlets. New specialty fruit crop selections are being researched to assess suitability for the market culture.

Pecan Power 86

By Bill Goff

Health benefits, overseas demand, research, and Extension mean big business for pecans in Alabama

T

hrough the last decade or so, several developments have improved prospects for the pecan industry and for growing pecans in Alabama. Individually, each development is important, and collectively these developments are industry-changing. Auburn University has been involved with many of these developments.

Foremost, the Chinese began consuming pecans in a major way, and China went from importing about two to three million pounds of pecans a decade ago to approximately 100 million pounds in 2012. Next, research has shown powerful nutritional benefits from consuming nuts and changed the perception of pecans from a fatty, indulgent food to a heart-healthy staple now recommended in most diets. Finally, research developments have improved our ability to grow pecans more efficiently.

Chinese Demand for Pecans Historically, China has been a minor consumer of pecans, as the Chinese were mostly unaware of

the nuts, which are native to the U.S. and Mexico.

Additionally, the high price of the nuts and the lack of affluent Chinese willing to purchase them were factors. From 2002-2005, pecan exports to China and to the Chinese gateways of Hong Kong and Vietnam averaged 2.9 million pounds, a fraction of the typical 300 million pound or so U.S. crop.

Then, in 2006, exports to China began to climb, reaching 88 million pounds in 2009 and projected to be 100 million pounds when final numbers are tallied for 2012. Put another way, China imported 1.3 percent of the 2002-2005 crop, and 33 percent or so of the 2012 crop, projected at 302.8 million pounds by the National Agricultural Statistics Service.

Needless to say, sending about one-third of the U.S. pecan crop to China impacted the price here at home. In 2010, the price for improved pecans (the grafted varieties mostly grown in Alabama) reached an all-time high of $2.49 per pound. This price shattered the old record set in 2004 of $1.92

by a phenomenal $.57 a pound. Then, in 2011, that all-time high was broken with a new high of $2.59 per pound.

The frenzy of buying and overpaying led to a correction, and in 2012 a lower price of $1.73 for improved pecans was set. Fortunately for southeastern growers, large nuts like the variety called “Desirable” held more firmly, and price outlook continues to be very favorable for these “export-quality” large nuts. The industry is retooling to grow more of these types to cater to the Chinese demand, and Auburn University’s history of research on cultivar performance is aiding growers in choosing suitable cultivars to cater to the new demand.

Health Benefits Nuts are high in calories and fat, so eating large quantities of them was often discouraged by nutritionists. Then research began to show that the fats in pecans and other nuts are primarily “good”

87

88

fats—monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, which promote heart health. Additionally, of all the tree nuts, pecans possess the greatest antioxidant capacity. Antioxidants are believed to help prevent disease-causing oxidation in cells.

Such oxidative damage has been linked to a wide variety of diseases, including heart disease, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease.

One ounce of pecans provides 10 percent of the recommended daily intake for fiber. Today, in striking contrast to a decade ago, nuts are a part of most universally accepted balanced diets, such as the Mediterranean Diet, which includes fish, poultry, vegetables, fresh and dried fruit, nuts, grains, olives, and olive oil.

Contrary to the widely held, but mistaken, belief that “nuts are too fattening,” several population studies found that as nut consumption increased, body fat actually decreased. And clinical studies have confirmed this conclusion, finding that eating nuts in moderate quantities does not promote weight gain. One study from the Harvard School of Public Health discovered that people following a weight-loss diet that contained 35 percent of calories from fat, including pecans as a fat source, were able to keep weight off longer than people following a traditionally recommended lower fat diet. Perhaps this is due to nuts being a satisfying

food that eases temptation to indulge in other, less healthy foods.

Epidemiological studies suggest that frequent nut consumption may protect against coronary heart disease because of beneficial effects on blood lipids. Compared to individuals who ate nuts less than one time per week, those who consumed them one to four times per week had a 25 percent reduced risk of dying from coronary heart disease; people who ate nuts five or more times per week experienced approximately a 50 percent reduction in risk.

Pecans are a rich source of oleic acid, the same type of fatty acid found in olive oil. Researchers from Northwestern University in Chicago recently found in laboratory tests that oleic acid has the ability to suppress the activity of a gene in cells thought to trigger breast cancer. While this area of study is still in its early stages, researchers say it could eventually translate into a recommendation to eat more foods rich in oleic acid, like pecans and olive oil. A one-ounce serving of pecans provides about 25 percent more oleic acid than a one-tablespoon serving of olive oil.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved a qualified health claim for nuts, including pecans, stating that “scientific evidence suggests, but does not prove, that eating 1.5

ounces per day of some nuts, as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol, may reduce the risk of heart disease.” Also, pecans qualify to bear the American Heart Association’s HeartCheck mark, which is the symbol of a program that organization launched in 1995 to help grocery shoppers quickly and easily identify heart-healthy foods.

The pecan industry was excited to learn recently that University of Georgia food science professor Ron Pegg will coordinate a major national study to further define the components and nutritional benefits of pecans. The study, funded by a $1.2 million federal grant, is a team effort involving participants from several states. Auburn horticulture professor and Extension specialist Bill Goff (this article’s author) is a senior adviser to the grant team.

Research Pecan trees are among the largest plants in the world that are managed intensively for crops. The size of the trees makes spraying, shaking, harvesting, hedging, and many other tasks difficult, expensive, and cumbersome. The machines needed for these tasks are large, powerful, and very costly. Any attempt to manage such pecan trees economically demands the efficiency gained through intensive research. Auburn’s program is a part of a national cooperative effort among universities, USDA,

private foundations, and growers to learn how to manage this crop.

Cultivar evaluations: One of the main pecan research contributions from Auburn is its involvement in cultivar selection and evaluation.

Because cultivars perform differently in different locations, and because strains of the damaging pecan scab fungus vary by location, it is important to have tests in multiple locations. Auburn has replicated pecan cultivar evaluations in five locations: • E. V. Smith Research Center near Tallassee— Cultivar evaluations here are overseen by research assistant Cathy Browne and associate director Jason Burkett. The important task of screening pecan selections for scab is conducted at this location. In cooperation with the USDA pecan breeding program, based in College Station, Texas, Auburn screens USDA pecans for scab in a location where scab incidence is much higher than where the pecans were developed. This ”acid test” often identifies disease-susceptible selections better than they have been identified at other locations, preventing growers from planting cultivars that would be too difficult to grow. In addition to

the stringent scab screening, pecan cultivars that pass the screening are moved into highinput and low-input evaluations. The high input mimics commercial growers’ methods, while the low input identifies cultivars needing little spray that might be suitable for homeowners, organic producers, and small plantings where intensive spraying isn’t feasible.

• Gulf Coast Research and Extension Center near Fairhope—Research associate Brian Wilkins and station director Malcolm Pegues oversee the research at this location in Alabama’s largest pecan-producing county. As at E.V. Smith, there are high-input and low-input separate tests. The 89 low-input test at Fairhope is being converted to organic, and once certification is obtained, will be the only organic-certified pecan cultivar test in the world.

• North Alabama—Because of the shorter growing season and greater potential for freezes, a different set of cultivars would be adapted in north Alabama. To identify these, and to help expand the industry northward in the state and away from hurricanes, tests are in place at the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center near Crossville and at

the North Alabama center near Belle Mina.

Cathy Browne directs these experiments and cooperates with station directors Joyce Ducar and Chet Norris.

• Grower cooperative trials—Experiment stations cannot always mimic large-scale producers, but large-scale producers are a very important clientele to Auburn because of their importance to agriculture. None of our experiment stations has access, for example, to hedging machines, which cost approximately $270,000 each. Large growers also routinely crop-thin their trees with expensive shakers, band fertilizer with specialized machines, and perform many other 90 large-scale practices that are difficult or too expensive at an experiment station. To address the needs of these growers and to test cultivars under conditions directly applicable to largescale producers, Auburn participates in a large cultivar evaluation with Friendship Pecans in Albany, Georgia.

Cultural research: Alabama pecan growers and industry leaders, notably Taylor Harper and Art Sessions of Grand Bay and Ken Buck of Bayou La Batre, led a lobbying effort to gain support for Auburn pecan research. Auburn

responded and has cultural research in addition to the cultivar development outlined above. Current focus areas including the following: • Fertilizer banding—Working cooperatively with researchers Mike Smith of Oklahoma State University and Lenny Wells of the University of Georgia, Goff is part of research demonstrating dramatic improvement in pecan tree performance when fertilizer is banded in a narrow strip above drip irrigation lines. The process has been a successful, more efficient way to apply phosphorus, potassium, and zinc.

• Hedging—Commonly used in the West but until recently not at all in the East, hedging can increase yield and quality of pecans and delay the need to remove trees as orchards overcrowd. Georgia pecan growers Tom Stevenson and Richard Merritt are working in cooperation with Mike Smith and Goff on experiments to define the best strategies for the technique. In south Alabama and similar coastal areas, hedging potentially could reduce vulnerability of pecan trees to hurricane damage by reducing the wind-catching canopy.

• High-density plantings—One of the biggest reasons more pecans are not planted is because of the long wait from planting until profitability.

The idea of planting pecan trees at high densities was examined years ago, and it largely failed— not because it was a bad idea, but because the chosen cultivars did not adapt well in the Southeast. Now, with better cultivars, hedging, and crop load management, we are re-examining this idea and have replicated trials and area spacings in grower locations.

• Fertigation—Applying fertilizer through irrigation water (fertigation) is efficient and environmentally friendly. Much more needs to be learned about how to best utilize this practice with pecans, so we have a major study ongoing with numerous treatments to see how we can maximize growth of young trees by injecting fertilizer.

• Irrigation—Alabama has abundant water resources that are underutilized in agriculture.

Prolonged drought and heat in the West has affected the ability to produce pecans there, creating opportunities in states with abundant water, like Alabama. At our Gulf Coast Station, Brian Wilkins is examining irrigation on pecans

in a wet location, on the premise that even though it’s very rainy there, the water is not always available at the proper time. With pecans in particular, the dominant need for water during kernel filling in September may need to be addressed with supplemental water.

Extension As the state leader of Auburn’s Extension horticultural program and a member of Auburn’s commercial horticulture team, Goff is supported by regional agents specializing in horticultural crops.

Several agents have pecans in their primary focus, notably Doug Chapman in Athens, Chip East in Ashland, Neil Kelly in Headland, and James Miles in Mobile. Through grower contacts, meetings, and publications, this team is a valuable resource in Auburn’s pecan program.

The strength of the Alabama Pecan Growers Association and support from the Alabama Farmers Federation has been and will continue to be instrumental to the success of the Alabama pecan industry and Auburn’s pecan programs.

Brian Wilkins (Gulf Coast center research associate) and I serve as advisers to the Alabama Pecan Growers Association board and chair the program committees. The annual association convention held in Fairhope in September and

the association’s summer tour are among the ways Extension delivers information to the growers. I am currently the program chairman for the Southeastern Pecan Growers. Auburn releases annual recommendations for successful cultivars and published the original Southeastern Pecan Growers Handbook, revised recently by the University of Georgia.

Chinese processors around Linan, China. Plans are underway to present samples from Auburn’s pecan cultivar evaluations directly to Chinese buyers for their assessment of suitability in the Chinese market.

Promotion Alabama is one of only three states—Georgia and Texas are the others—where growers have passed a voluntary check-off program through which a portion of the cost of each pound of pecans sold is allocated for research and promotion. Matt Goff, Bill’s son, manages the largest pecan orchard in Alabama, near Lowndesboro. Matt as a grower and Bill with Auburn are actively involved in pecan promotional efforts, especially within the expanding China market. In cooperation with the Georgia Pecan Growers Association, the National Pecan Growers Council, the Southeastern United States Trade Association (SUSTA), and Chinese buyers, they have each been to China twice to promote pecans.

Auburn is cooperating with Carter Brothers Pecans of Brundidge, Alabama, in an expanding effort to match pecan growers directly with

91

Developing pecans in July of the rainy 2013 season at Auburn’s research orchard at the E. V. Smith Research Center in Central Alabama. On left, pecans of the standard cultivar, Desirable, are heavily damaged by the pecan scab disease and will not mature, while those of a more resistant test selection are free of disease symptoms and undamaged.

The Rural Studio Farm 92

by Elena Barthel

Looking Ahead to Its Roots

T

here are three important things I learned growing up in Italy. The first one was the appreciation of my grandmotherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s apple pie.

The care involved in the preparation, from choosing the ingredients to baking the cake, was a ritual. The smells in the kitchen were beautiful and during my childhood the afternoons were rewarded with delicious snacks as part of my play time.

The second important thing is the difference between a San Marzano and a Fiorentino, to name just two of the many Italian tomatoes you can find at farmers markets. In Italy tomatoes come from very different regions with the most remarkable variety of tastes, colors, and shapes. They are affordable to everyone, seasonal, fresh, and easily accessible. Each type of tomato has a background evolving from the climate, soil, and the culture of its origin. For instance San Marzanos come from Campania (Sarno River valley) and are perfect for drying under the southern Italian sun.

The third learning experience came later with my doctorate in architecture, when I started looking at the aesthetic, economic, and environmental qualities of small-scale food systems. Pantelleria, an island between Italy and Africa, is my favorite example of a well-designed short agricultural supply chain. The strength of its settlement is based on the resilient relationship between food, land use (both growing and living), and community development.

Seventy percent of the population lives off the land and the food consumed on the island produces most of the community income. At the same time, buildings and landscapes are built by the local farmers with materials from the land around.

Architecture and agriculture work as a symbiotic holistic system, creating both beautiful landscapes and tasty, healthy food.

The island isolation in the Mediterranean Sea forced the population to reach a high degree of selfefficiency, both in terms of cultivation choices and infrastructure design. Since the Middle Ages, farms

were built aiming for the best use of rainwater, sun, and wind energy. The wise use of local resources started with the construction of the typical dwelling, called Dammuso, and the land terraces with the same local obsidian stone. While the Dammuso progressively become the best housing strategy, the terraces were built to face south and became the perfect land to grow olive trees, wines, and capers. 93 I never realized how much the Italian food culture is part of my background until I moved to Hale County five years ago. When I first went to the local grocery store I could not believe how many types of mozzarella cheese where displayed in plastic bags.

They all looked alike, beside the packaging, and not one of them smelled or tasted like mozzarella.

These cheeses are produced in U.S. states far away from Hale County and donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have any relationship with the cow that every morning comes to my front yard in Newbern looking for fresh grass.

In many areas of the South, a frugal and organic approach to growing fresh food no longer exists

given the availability of industrially processed food that composes the Western diet. The health, environmental, social, economic, and aesthetic implications of this process are evident.

As a result, we expect 70 percent of the population to be obese in 20 years, and the quality of the region’s food has deteriorated in lockstep with its landscape. Rural settlements have progressively devolved into what I like to call the “sub-rural sprawl.”

They tend to become places where people retire, buy hunting lodges, or towns they just sleep in after commuting somewhere else for work. We don’t expect rural settlements to be productive anymore.

But one of the reasons I like Hale County is be94 cause the landscape is still shaped by farmers. I like the fact that its aesthetic is defined by its efficiency.

I think that responding to the disappearance of locally grown food in west Alabama is an emerging necessity and I would like to suggest that, in the last 80 years, the lack of fresh food culture has progressively become one of the main poverties affecting small rural settings. Ultimately, everybody deserves access to good quality, fresh, and affordable food. But in Hale County a cabbage often costs more than a Happy Meal, and it is much less accessible. Only few small towns have a farmers market and usually they are only open during the summer months.

I believe that as architects, planners, and educators, we all need to tackle the constellation of the related problems besetting our rural region. A rediscovery of the southern cuisine, with its frugal approach to locally grown seasonal food, and its unique identity, is needed. And that is why the Rural Studio Farm project started1.

The Rural Studio Farm Since the beginning of the program, Auburn University students have been challenged by the Rural Studio to live, design, and build in a rural settlement answering two important questions.

How Should We Live in a Rural Setting?

This first question has been explored since 1994 with the client house project, an affordable rural house based on the needs, resources, and personality of its client. The goal was to define an alternative to homogeneous low-income housing projects. Over the last 10 years, the Rural Studio housing explorations have evolved into the “20k house,” a durable house for everyone that is affordable, beautiful, and sustainable.

How Should We Build in a Rural Setting?

This second question has also been explored since the beginning of the program with the experimentation of a large variety of recycled materi-

als. Recently the studio has focused its attention on the use of local timber, the most renewable building material on our planet. Since 2006 two strategies have been experimented with: “lamella” and “thinnings.” With the lamella projects, the studio tested an alternative to metal structures by archiving long-spans using dimensional lumber.

Currently, with the thinnings project, the studio is investigating the use of underutilized small round wood in construction.

With the same attitude toward environmental consciousness, the next question for the Rural Studio students is how should we eat, produce, and consume in a rural setting?

Since 2008 this question has been explored by the Rural Studio farm. The farm represents our attempt to live more sustainably by producing our own food, energy, and wood. I call it selfefficiency, a way to think and act locally with a holistic and environmentally friendly attitude in search of a better quality of life. Self-efficiency is opposite to self-sufficiency: it implies working as a system open to the surroundings. The ultimate goal is to develop an interdisciplinary laboratory for sustainable agriculture techniques, passive architecture, and construction methods with low energy consumption and emissions. Most important, the farm demonstrates sustainable and

efficient growing strategies in a community that has largely abandoned small-scale food systems.

Our hope is that the studio’s prototypes—the solar greenhouse, the food forest, the horticultural garden, and holistic irrigation system—can be exported and adopted elsewhere.

Starting in 2008 we wanted to “walk the walk” and we hired a chef. Our own students’ food was being cooked in a Greensboro kitchen and transported 10 miles to Newbern, which was not sustainable. We built ourselves a kitchen garden and a commercial kitchen, and we are now completing a solar greenhouse to produce food all year around.

An alternative to the diffused Western diet the Rural Studio now follows a “flexitarian diet” based on fresh, mainly vegetables locally produced, as recently defined by Michael Pollan in his book In Defense of Food. The motto is “eat food, not too much, mostly plants.”

With this in mind the Rural Studio aims to support the west Alabama organic farmers. The idea is to become “co-producers,” as opposed to passive consumers, and build a network of organic farmers using the Rural Studio farm as a catalyst. Every year we invite local organic farmers to participate in a sustainable potluck. The participating farms have become case studies for our students.

The Rural Studio farm aims to produce not only food but also energy needed to run its operations and wood needed to construct its components. We believe that diversifying and producing a variety of commodities is the key to long-lived and sustainable small-scale agriculture and that if we can live mostly off the land, the larger community can too.

The long-term farm plan is to benefit our community as well as the Rural Studio. Our strategies demonstrate our wish to practice what we preach and, in the process, sharpen our own tools, increase our knowledge, and convey more value to our students and our neighbors. The project represents an opportunity to tackle the big issues facing rural areas and to design a rural future of improved food availability.

These are BIG dreams! Rural Studio suggests that big change for a better and more responsible quality of life can be achieved working at a small scale. The studio’s farm takes pointers from the studio’s experience with multi-phase, multi-year projects, in which each phase of a project builds on those preceding it.

Phase 1: Raised Kitchen Garden (2008) Third-year, thesis, and outreach students built the kitchen garden in the front yard of Morrisette House, the main Rural Studio building. Because the kitchen garden faces Highway 61 and has

become the studio’s public face, we see our raised beds as being part of our community rather than as just a private garden.

95 Why raise the cultivation beds? In order to place them at a more comfortable height for those working on them, to allow us to farm with our own mix of topsoil and compost rather than the depleted local soil and to provide drainage.

Phase 2: Commercial Kitchen (2009) The studio’s new commercial kitchen allows us to cook what we produce on site. Seventy percent of the food served at the studio is now vegetables and fruits and will be progressively self-produced.

The kitchen, certified by the health department, is an extension of Morrisette House and is

separated from the original house by a dogtrot.

The addition adheres to the age-old local practice of separating the main house and the kitchen to protect the house from catching fire.

96

Phase 3: Morrisette Property Strategic Plan (2010-today) The first thing you need to consider when starting a farm is that it is a full-time job. Plants and livestock need a lot of time-consuming care.

So you want to locate your most intensive crops as close as possible to where you live. That’s why our third-year students have created Morrisette as the farm’s “center of production,” a demonstration project composed of two edible systems: the first is a horticultural garden that will feed 40 students three days a week. The second is a food forest that adds fruits and berries.

The strategic plan re-routes Morrisette’s entrance to increase the property’s arable, sunny land. The new configuration will replace the existing driveway with two new access roads. A public road at the north and south edges of the properties will lead to Morrisette’s new entrance and a more private northern driveway will go to the residential “pods” in Morrisette’s backyard. Morrisette’s plan is made up of the following: The horticultural garden occupies Morrisette’s front yard. The garden includes a 2,000-square-foot solar greenhouse, a 600-square-foot seed house, a washing station, and storage for tools in the greenhouse. Raised and ground beds grow tall, medium, and short plants.

The food forest at the back of the property is a continuation of an existing grove of pecan trees on the south property line. I like to see the food forest as the opposite of the food desert: a resilient system requiring no maintenance, with seven layers of trees and bushes complementing each other as companion plants. The forest will provide fruit for the Rural Studio’s humans and our free-range livestock.

The irrigation system, a holistic water collection and irrigation system, will tie the farm together.

The water system is designed to be self-sustaining even through a two-and-a-half-month period of drought. Water is collected from all the roofs

on the property. Ground water, meanwhile, is captured via a series of swales, gravel paths, and driveway ditches. All the groundwater is directed to and collected in a natural retention pond, a backup system for dry periods. Collected water is stored in underground tanks and gravity pressurized distribution columns of water (similar to water towers) that will be used for a drip-fed irrigation system to individual plants. Solar pumps run all the water collection, storage, and distribution systems.

Phase 4: The Solar Greenhouse (2010-today) The greenhouse produces both the warmth and rainwater needed for growing plants. Facing south, its canted solar glass collector and 55-gallon galvanized blue drums have become the signpost and identifying structure for the farm and the Rural Studio. Passersby can’t miss it.

The structure consists of three 25-by-25-foot bays, plus an extra bay containing the seed house.

The bays are separated by a dogtrot that allows tractor access. The thermal wall, consisting of four rows of stacked blue drums filled with water, collects the sun’s heat during the day and radiates warmth at night. The barrels’ blue-painted color helps to both raise the water temperature and the plants’ germination process.

Farmers Markets To date the strongest impact the Rural Studio’s farm project has had on our community has been the creation of the local Greensboro farmers market.

In order to create strong local support for the market, the Rural Studio’s faculty was asked to create a marketing team to inform the community. We designed a logo and directional signage, painted a mural, produced pamphlets with information about the Farmer’s Market, and created a website and miscellaneous retail items, including postcards, t-shirts, stickers, and shopping bags. The children of Greensboro Elementary School created posters for the Farmers’ Market.

The owner of a vacant lot in Greensboro gave the city permission to use his property for the Farmers Market but he wouldn’t allow a permanent structure to be built there. In response, we designed a movable stand. The stand’s dimensions correspond to the maximum size permitted on a highway.

Inside the stall, there is ample space for two vendors, sitting or standing. As the market expands, new units can be added. There is room for farm trucks to pull up behind each stand. The Greensboro Farmers Market opened in June 2011 with full support from local growers, the Alabama Cooperative Extension System/Hale County,

the Alabama Department of Public Health, the Alabama Farmers Federation, the Alabama Farmers Market Authority, HERO (Hale County Empowerment and Revitalization Organization), and the community. During its three-year existence, the market has already had to operate in two different locations, proving its mobility.

Everyone involved in creating the market understood that, though it addressed the requirements of Greensboro, the market prototype could serve a much broader population.

In fact, there are many small cities and towns in west Alabama that would like a farmers market but do not own sufficient land for a permanent market structure. Providing municipalities with a more permanent infrastructure than the usual tent and tables entices more growers to participate in local markets, a first step to encouraging better community health and supporting our local growers.

The Rural Studio farm project is supported by Auburn University’s Extension Office in Greensboro and the Jones Valley Urban Farm in Birmingham. The project is working to form interdisciplinary partnerships at Auburn for research and educational purposes, specifically with the College of Agriculture and the Department of Agronomy and Soils.

97

by John Jensen 98

Auburn Fishes for Challenges

A History of Success

T

he world faces a challenge: the difficulty of feeding the 7 billion people who live on earth right now. If estimations are correct and another 2 to 3 billion people are added by 2050, “challenge” could well become “crisis.”

If we are to feed, clothe, shelter, and fuel an extra 2 billion hungry souls–and respond to the needs of the approximately 2 billion moving into the middle class—can we do it simply by expanding our farms?

Not likely. For starters, there is less and less arable land available for farming. That is the case not only in the United States, but also around the world.

Another issue? Water. Seventy-five percent of all available water on earth is used for agriculture.

And it takes a lot of water to grow things: producing one kilogram of grain requires 1,500 liters of water, which translates to 15,000 liters of water to grow one kilogram of beef. With looming issues of water scarcity and water security, maintaining (much less increasing) our beef consumption is not a foregone conclusion.

Is there any good news here? I’ll get to that. But let me start with a history story.

It begins in 1933, when a team of scientists, led

by Dr. Homer S. Swingle, began to research inland fisheries and aquaculture. During the 1930s and ‘40s, Dr. Swingle focused on constructing farm ponds. Not only does a farm pond help capture and conserve water, but it also provides a ready source for fresh protein: fish. This was especially important in a rural state without much access to refrigeration. Pond construction and stocking became significant areas of research at Auburn, and today, as a result, there are literally millions of fish ponds stocked and managed using AU’s farm pond technology.

During the 1950s and ‘60s, Auburn researchers focused on identifying fish species that might be adapted to pond production. Channel catfish were promising, and today AU can claim bragging rights for developing hatchery techniques, identifying nutritional requirements, controlling diseases and

water quality, and helping to develop and improve the entire value stream from pond to plate. In fact, Auburn professor Claude Boyd designed and engineered a pond aerator that today is the most widely used aeration device in the world.

Swingle, Boyd, and many others have put Auburn University on the cutting edge of global aquaculture research. Their work has changed— 99 and improved—life for people in Alabama and around the world.

Tilapia In the 20th century, tilapia, a family of fish native to tropical and subtropical Africa, was gaining prominence as a fish for food. Tilapia had been farmed for centuries in Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean, and in the 1950s and ‘60s, three species and a mutant red tilapia were promoted around the world because of their farming potential. They have many virtues: tilapia readily reproduce in ponds, withstand poor water quality,

feed low on the food chain, are disease resistant, and flourish in fresh to brackish water. They are also good to eat.

Early attempts to farm tilapia in the 1950s and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;60s used mixed-sex fish in small earthen ponds with additions of fertilizer to produce fish for harvest by impoverished people in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. However, farm-raised tilapia reproduced so robustly that ponds became quickly crowded and offspring competed with adults.

Competition led to slow growth and stunting. As a result, harvests produced small fish with little value in the market and even less appeal to consumers.

Scientists realized that adding fish to the existing 100 population (known as recruitment) increased tilapia density, which would need to be controlled in order to harvest larger, more valuable fish.

The first attempts to control recruitment during farming (culture) in the 1960s and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;70s focused on three steps: 1) the production of mixed sexes of tilapia in ponds stocked with predator fish, 2) visual selection of faster growing male tilapia by identifying morphological differences between males and females, and 3) hybridization of closely related species to yield all-male offspring. These methods did control some recruitment during culture and larger tilapia were successfully produced. However, problems were encountered that limited wide adoption

by farmers. Culture with a predator had additional costs associated with producing predator seed stock and, further, female tilapia grew slower than males. Visual selection of male tilapia juveniles was labor-intensive and females were discarded, resulting in high production costs. Hybridization to produce all male offspring yielded low numbers of male fry compared with the same-specie spawning and added the problem of maintaining genetic purity of parents over the long term.

Mono-Sex Production The first breakthrough in mono-sex production of tilapia occurred in 1975, when R. D. Guerrero, an Auburn Ph.D. student under the direction of Dr. William Shelton, reported in his dissertation research on steroid-induced sex reversal of tilapia fry. Successful research demonstrating that naturally produced tilapia fed androgen yielded 85 to 100 percent males led to an increased body of research aimed at developing a protocol that would consistently maximize male seed produced.

Shelton, from the Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Unit, and his Auburn colleague, Dr. Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Neal Smitherman, focused their efforts on refining technology and applying it to real-world situations where economics, food safety, and the ability to produce commercial quantities of tilapia would

maximize its potential as the next great farmed animal. Shelton and Smitherman designed research to determine the type and amount of male steroid and duration of its administration under different environmental conditions to maximize male tilapia fingerling yield. Additional research addressed improvement of spawning methods to increase tilapia fry output of the correct age for optimal sex-reversal success. Shelton also designed and conducted research to show clearance of the androgens from fry and adults to demonstrate that sex-reversed tilapia were safe for human consumption.

Once efficacy of the process was demonstrated, commercial-scale application of the technology was tested, and questions related to food safety and human health were answered, the stage was set for the rapid growth of commercial tilapia farming worldwide.

There is no doubt that the steroid-induced sex reversal to produce all male populations of tilapia and the application of that technology throughout the value stream (i.e., hatchery, nursery, growout, harvest, processing, and marketing) led to the phenomenal development in production and consumption of tilapia worldwide.

Since 1984, the wild catch of tilapia has increased by less than 500,000 metric tons while the supply of tilapia from aquaculture has grown

around 3 million tons. Most of the growth has occurred in Asia and Africa, although tilapia production exists in more than 100 countries. China is the world leader in tilapia production. Other large producers include Egypt, Indonesia, Thailand, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and the Philippines.

because of its positive culture characteristics, it is one of the most sustainable types of aquaculture on earth, as well as a very important source of animal protein around the world. Tilapia production and consumption have grown at astonishing rates, and they will continue to increase.

Although tilapia has been farmed for 3,000 years, it only became able to feed the many mouths it does because of the work of Auburn University students and faculty.

Aquacultureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Impact The growth in tilapia production is almost entirely due to aquaculture. Records from the FAO Fishstate Plus database for quantity and value dating back to 1975 show tilapia production through 2007 increased from 1982 by about 100 times. The growth in production is continuing at a pace never experienced by any other farmed fish. The total farm-gate value of world tilapia production is more than $3 billion. This does not account for the value added to the produce as it moves from the farmer to the consumer. There are no estimates as to the number of people employed in tilapia production worldwide, but obviously new businesses set up to produce, harvest, process, and market tilapia have had a significant positive impact on world fish supplies. Marine fisheries cannot keep up with demand for fish protein and tilapia has helped the supply keep pace with demand from people who are moving into a growing middle class around the world. Also, in many countries of Africa, Asia, and

Latin America, tilapia continue to contribute to subsistence diets as a source of high-quality protein produced at a relatively low cost.

As an example of its increasing world importance, data from the USDA Economic Research Service show that imports of tilapia into the United States increased from 7.5 million pounds in 1992 to 396 million pounds by 2008. The value of these imports increased from $6 million in 1992 to $843 million in 2010, making it the fifth most popular fish in the United States at well over one pound consumed per capita.

The Tilapia Advantage The advantages of tilapia production are numerous for a growing world population. It substitutes for many desirable marine and freshwater fish, and

The Good News Fish is the most commonly eaten protein on earth. Through research, education, outreach, extension, and a number of invaluable partner101 ships, Auburn Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences has improved the quality of life for millions of people through domestic and international development projects.

Auburn faculty and graduates work in Alabama and across the globe to manage, protect, conserve, and enhance aquatic resources.

There has never been a more exciting time in fish production. And there is work for many hands to make life sustainable and enriched for the billions who share our earth and the billions more who will join us in the coming decades.

102

Meeting Consumer Expectations

By Terry Hanson, David Cline , Corey Court wright, Yif e n Wa ng, a n d Shaoyang Liu

Coloration in Catfish Fillets

Y

ellow pigmentation in catfish fillets has been observed for many years; however, only in recent years has it become a major industry issue.

Catfish fillets with yellow pigmentation, especially those going to fresh market outlets, are seen by consumers as undesirable or even thought to have spoiled when there is actually no taste or freshness problem with the fillets. People have certain expectations about product color, and when deviations occur, they believe something is wrong with the product. Because of this negative perception by consumers, some buyers have begun refusing fillets with yellow pigment.

In 2009, there was a surge in reported yellow fillets. The sudden declaration by a prominent large-volume U.S. catfish buyer that it would no longer buy U.S. catfish if the industry did not solve, or show progress toward solving, the yellow fillet coloration issue was shocking. For that reason, the catfish industry asked Auburn University researchers to revisit this problem to determine how to

provide a high-quality product with relatively consistent color to avoid economic losses. Since 2010, Auburn research and Extension personnel have been actively working to identify the sources of the pigments and to develop processing methods that may lessen the discoloration.

Also in 2009, a “Pond-to-Plate” project was initiated at Auburn University through collaboration between the Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures—now the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences—and the Alabama catfish industry. This project brought together catfish producers, harvesters, processors, and retailers to develop a value stream for the industry, including identification of constraints facing the industry and the causes of yellowness in catfish fillets.

Establishing Catfish Fillet Color Standards David Cline, an aquaculture specialist with the Alabama Cooperative Extension System, used his

extensive knowledge of photography to collaborate with west Alabama catfish processors to define proper catfish fillet coloration in order to provide consistently colored fillets to buyers. Unlike in the salmon industry, where there has been a significant amount of work and experimentation to create color standards and grading methods, little work has been done along these lines for catfish. In fact, 103 there are currently no color standards for catfish in the U.S. catfish industry—no optimum color, measure of acceptable deviation from this optimum color, or color grades have been established. When people see catfish fillets in varying shades of pink, white, and yellow lying in the seafood case, they often question which color is the best or freshest.

One challenge of the “Pond-to-Plate” project was to devise a method to consistently and accurately measure catfish fillet coloration. If these color standards are adopted by the industry, it will be possible to develop standardized color categories or grades.

Color is measured by a variety of methods.

Regardless of the method employed, there are three components necessary to visually identify and evaluate color: A light source, an object, and an observer. Light sources vary in color, and objects will appear differently under different lighting conditions. Our brains have adapted to do these changing conditions automatically, but mechanical devices—cameras—must be told how to measure the light. For instance, almost everyone has seen a photograph taken under fluorescent lighting where a person’s skin appears to have a greenish hue— this is because of the way the camera is measuring light in the photo. Candlelight or firelight can cause 104 things to appear more yellow.

A light source’s color temperature is measured by a unit called Kelvin (K). The reason this measurement is called a “temperature” is because it was derived from a theoretical object called a “black body radiator.” When the radiator is heated, it changes from black to red to yellow to white to blue. The lower the Kelvin rating, the “warmer” or more yellow the light is. The higher the rating, the “cooler” or more blue the light. To put things in perspective, here are some common light sources and their approximate temperature in degrees Kelvin (K): Candle—1800 K; indoor tungsten—3000 K; indoor fluorescent—4000 K;

outdoor sunlight—5500 K; outdoor shade—7500 K; and north sky—28000 K. A person can be a very effective observer of color and able to distinguish between many shades and hues. However, the problem with developing a color standard based on the observation of a person is that different people perceive colors differently and with varying sensitivity. We chose to use a camera and properly calibrated software as an unbiased, accurate, and consistent observer.

Color evaluation of fillets can be conducted using a photo spectrometer, which takes a very specific, highly calibrated, sensitive, and accurate measurement from a very small area of the fish flesh. The variability in our product makes this approach problematic because it only measures small portions of the whole. With the camera and calibration software, it was possible to take into account the amount and intensity of color over the entire fillet.

Catfish fillets taken directly from the processing line were laid on a uniform white cutting board and placed in a box made of translucent material (a light cube). Two sides of the cube were lit using 3150K video spotlights. Sheets of white foam core were also placed underneath, in front, and in back of the cube to avoid color contamination from nearby objects. The fillets were photographed

using a Canon 40D digital camera using the RAW format, which captures and maintains all information in the scene. Photos translated to the common format, JPEG images, are typically analyzed and processed in-camera by various algorithms, and the camera presents what it “thinks” you want. JPEG images are typically smaller because some of the color data is compressed or discarded altogether.

Using the same lighting conditions, a photograph of a checkerboard-like array of standardized color patches called a color target was also captured, in this case an Xrite Colorchecker Passport.

The color patches are “scientifically prepared” colors that represent natural colors like human skin, blue sky, and green foliage. This photograph and the color calibration software made it possible to create a specific camera/lighting profile to use in the Photoshop program.

The photos were transferred to a computer and run through a series of steps using the Photoshop software. Photoshop made it possible to digitally extract the fillet from the background and determine the average color value for the fillet as a whole. The LAB color space is based on one channel for Luminance (lightness, L) and two color channels (a and b). The “a” color value is a spectrum from green (negative value) on one end to red (positive value) on the other end. The “b”

value is a similar spectrum from blue (negative) to yellow (positive) and represents the third axis. The LAB color space was especially useful because we were focusing on the yellow color.

Results from the analysis allowed us to create a color spectrum for the fillets. Sample fillets from across the spectrum were used to create three color categories. The validity of the color categories was tested by asking industry experts to place 100 fillets into one of the three categories.

There was only a 68 percent agreement between the members of the group. Using the fillets with the highest agreement rates, a second version of the color chart was developed. Five groups of experts were then given identical sets of photographs (of fillets) and were asked to place the photos into the three categories. There was

Fig 3.

92 percent agreement among the groups on which fillets fell into category one and 88 percent agreement on the other two categories. The result of the project was the “Cline Color Scale” for catfish fillets (Photo 3).

The catfish industry is facing many challenges in producing a consistently high-quality, high-value product. The development of this color scale is but a single step. Long-term goals of the catfish industry include developing a set of best management practices that will provide catfish fillets of consistent color, flavor, and texture. In the meantime, this scale could be used by processing line workers to separate the fillets into different categories for different markets. At a minimum, the scale would make it possible to get similar-colored fillets into the same box to avoid confusion at the retail level.

Catfish Pond Management Factors Dr. Corey Courtwright worked on a portion of the “Pond-to-Plate” project to address the yellow fillet issue by analyzing the catfish pond management practices that lead to the occurrence of the yellow color. Catfish ponds are, in actuality, an intricate interaction of many variables of water chemistry and soil chemistry as well as plant and animal life, which make this analysis complex.

These interactions are managed and driven by farmer inputs and management practices.

Therefore, to analyze which particular management practices strongly influenced the build-up of yellow pigment in some catfish fillets, an ecosystem 105 approach was necessary. Analyzing each of the series of complex interactions in the ecosystem would be a time-consuming, costly task; therefore, a study was designed and carried out using survey data detailing pond management practices and linking them to the occurrence of yellow fillets at the processing plant.

A survey of catfish farmer production practices was conducted for individual ponds in west Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas from December 2009 through December 2011. The survey consisted of 25 questions pertaining to 126 management practice variables. In total, 154 ponds

spanning 28 farms in three states were surveyed. A correlation analysis was used to identify management practice variables significantly correlated to the occurrence of yellow fillets. After conducting the correlation analysis, those variables were used to produce regression models of management practices responsible for yellow fillets.

The best regression models included the following variables: Days off feed before harvest, presence of snails, number of harvests in the last year, and presence of threadfin shad. Other variables, such as method of copper sulfate application, fillet size, and season of harvest, were also statistically significant. These significant variables make the 106 case that catfish consuming natural productivity (algae, shad, etc.) have a higher incidence of producing yellow color in their processed-fillet state. The results of this study demonstrated that feeding strategies where catfish receive all of their nutritional requirements from commercial rations instead of being supplemented by natural productivity, as well as management plans that control algal blooms, could significantly reduce the occurrence of yellow fillets in U.S. farm-raised catfish industry.

This study identified these best management practices for reducing the number of yellow fillets:

1. Reduce the number of days that fish are left off feed before harvesting. Fish should be left off feed at least one day before harvest in order to empty their stomach of food with the effect of reducing hauling stress. However, this study shows that the longer fish are left off feed, the higher the incidence of yellow fillets. Therefore, this interval should be minimized even in the winter, when fish are commonly left off feed for long periods because of slow metabolism.

2. Threadfin shad should be removed from the production system. Threadfin shad are commonly stocked in catfish ponds because they can have a positive influence on the pond algal community and also serve as forage for catfish.

This study shows that the presence of threadfin shad strongly increases the incidence of yellow fillet and, therefore, should be removed from catfish production systems.

3. Fish should be harvested frequently. It was found that the more harvests occurring in a year, the fewer occurrences of yellowness in the fillet. Harvesting more frequently keeps the population of catfish in a multiple-batch production system more uniform in size. This evens the competition between size classes for commercial feed and thereby decreases the amount of foraging done by smaller catfish.

4. Use weekly applications of copper sulfate or diuron to manage algae blooms during the catfishgrowing season (March through September).

Certain types of algae are the source of pigments that build up in the catfish fillets and cause yellowness. Therefore, aquatic herbicides should be applied to control algae.

In addition, the regression model produced in this study predicted the percent of fillets from a pond that will exhibit yellow coloration. Being able to predict the occurrence of yellow fillet is a powerful tool for farm managers. By using such models, farm managers can predict the effect of a management change on the color quality of the fillets they produce.

Reducing Yellow Coloration at the Processing Plant When Dr. Shaoyang Liu worked for Dr. Yifen Wang at AU’s Department of Biosystems Engineering, he worked on a portion of the “Pond-to-Plate” project investigating use of chemical treatments, or “washes,” to reduce the yellowness in catfish fillets once they were processed. Chemical treatments are a common technique widely applied in food processing to improve product quality and achieve other benefits. Chemical dips have been used in the shrimp industry to delay shrimp color change during storage and prolong their shelf life. Yellow

coloration in catfish fillets became even more yellow and darker during storage. A suitable chemical treatment may prevent this undesirable change or even reduce the yellow discoloration.

To find an efficient recipe for such chemical treatments, a good understanding of the pigments found in yellow-colored catfish fillets is required.

Once known, the characteristics of the pigments can be used to develop chemical washes to treat and reduce the yellow coloration. Scientists investigated this issue in the 1980s and found lutein and zeaxanthin—two pigments found in yellow corn—within the yellow-colored catfish fillets. Yellow corn is a major catfish feed ingredient, and this result pointed out one source for the yellow pigmentation in catfish fillets. However, no comprehensive pigment analysis was performed at that time.

To get a comprehensive understanding of the yellow pigments in catfish fillets, a quantitative extraction method was developed to collect all the pigments in the fillet. Then the extracted pigments were examined by two advanced chemical analysis instruments, HPLC and LC-MS. The results indicated that besides lutein and zeaxanthin, there was another principle yellow pigment—called alloxanthin—present in the fillet. Alloxanthin does not exist in yellow corn, but it does exist in some

algae species found in the catfish pond, which suggests both the feeds and the natural foods are the sources of yellow pigments in fillets. The total pigment content in catfish fillets ranged from 58 ng/g for slightly yellow fillets to approximately 215 ng/g for the enhanced yellow fillets. The analysis also revealed that the sum of the contents of the three principle pigments (lutein, zeaxanthin, and alloxanthin) was proportional to yellowness of a fillet, which confirmed that the three pigments are the main causes of the yellow discoloration.

All three major yellow pigments detected in yellow-colored catfish fillet belong to carotenoids, a group of natural organic pigments in plant, algae, bacteria, and fungi that are relatively sensitive to light and heat and can degrade in many different ways. Analysis showed that the three carotenoid contents decreased when the fillets became yellower during storage, suggesting that the carotenoids degraded into even yellower products. So the first effort of the chemical treatment was to suppress the decomposition of the pigments to prevent the intensification of the yellowness. Several FDA-approved antioxidants were used to treat the yellow-colored fillets. The chemicals did slow down the degradation of the pigments during storage, but the changes were not enough to noticeably reduce the increase of the yellowness.

Since this idea did not work, the focus shifted to finding a method to change the degradation pathways of the pigments so that less yellow products would be generated. A range of FDA-approved chemicals and their combinations were tested, and two chemical washes successfully lessened the yellowness of the fillet. The next step in this work will be to optimize the recipe of the chemical washes and to understand the pigment degradation mechanisms better in order to further improve the treatment efficiency.

Summary Product color is important to consumers, and an effort to reduce unwanted yellow pigmentation in catfish fillets is an ongoing research focus at Auburn University. The U.S. farm-raised catfish industry is intent on providing a consistent highquality, aesthetically pleasing product, and these research efforts are helping the industry move forward. In today’s world of intense international seafood competition, the U.S. seafood industry must keep pace by working with researchers to solve real-world issues.

107

P

R

OFI

L

E

David Rouse

Forty Plus Years With Fish

by Karen Hunley

108

The last two years have been an exciting time for David Rouse and the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences. Rouse, who retired as director of the school in October 2013, was able to see the fisheries and aquatics program make the transition from a department into a school. After years of planning and discussions among Rouse, previous fisheries department heads, Auburn President Jay Gogue, and other university figures, a formal proposal was submitted in early 2013, and the Auburn Board of Trustees officially designated the school in June 2013.

“We had talked about (becoming a school) and desired it for the last 15 years,” Rouse says. “The timing was right, the president was supportive, and I think everything just came together.”

Rouse says he wanted to stay on board his last year (2012-2013) primarily to help the program make that important transition. He served as

department head for 12 years and on the fisheries department faculty for 32 years.

“We have so many partnerships, and being a school carries more prominence as we work overseas and with other universities and government agencies,” he adds.

The department also had grown to the point that it needed more administrative support—which comes with being a school.

The flourishing fisheries program can be partly attributed to another proud moment for Rouse— the 2011 opening of the new Center for Aquatic Resource Management, located at the E.W. Shell Fisheries Research Center on Alabama 147 north of campus. The $9 million-plus center consists of a 20,000-square-foot administration building and a 17,000-square-foot laboratory that offers stateof-the-art aquatic research and teaching facilities.

Rouse says that his department worked tirelessly with the district’s congressional delegation to obtain the funding for the center. Primary funding came through the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.

During his tenure at Auburn, Rouse also made great strides in developing mutually beneficial international partnerships. In 2008, Ocean University of China selected the fisheries department to partner in a program to exchange 10 doctoral

students from both universities each year and to hold joint conferences in an effort to capitalize on each university’s knowledge in fisheries and aquatic sciences. Essentially, Ocean University wanted to partner with the top university fisheries program in the world and chose Auburn.

Additionally, Rouse says that Auburn fisheries has provided short-term technical support in more than 115 countries through the International Center for Aquaculture and Aquatic Sciences. The center has also assisted with long-term projects in 15 countries, with the ultimate goal of helping them become more self-sufficient in aquatic food production. The International Center for Aquaculture was created at Auburn in 1970 when the U.S. Agency for International Development requested technical and socio-economic assistance in aquaculture, inland fisheries, and living aquatic resources management for developing countries.

Rouse explains that Auburn has actually been involved in international outreach for decades, thanks to “a culture in Alabama that allowed us to do this kind of work.” Auburn fisheries faculty have partnered with countries all over the globe to expand their food production, including countries in Central America, Africa, and Asia. While part of the motivation is humanitarian, there is also an economic incentive. When people have enough

food to eat, their countries become more stable, their economies improve, and many may eventually begin to import goods and services from the United States, Rouse says.

The program’s vast international efforts have merged well with Rouse’s personal goals as well.

“I like to work to improve the quality of life for people,” he says.

Teaching also provided an outlet for Rouse to help others, which is why he left his original career as a marine biologist for the state of Alabama— and before that, for the state of Florida—to pursue full-time teaching. As a biologist in Alabama, he focused mainly on environmental issues such as oil spills and regulatory activities related to marine life. At the same time, he taught freshman biology and freshwater ecology part time at Auburn University-Montgomery and loved working with the students, he says.

In fact, when he wasn’t in the classroom, he realized he missed working with students. That’s when Rouse decided to enter graduate school at Texas A&M University to work on a doctorate in fisheries. He already had his bachelor’s degree in marine biology and master’s in fisheries, both from Auburn.

Since earning his doctorate, Rouse has taught many classes and training programs on a variety

of topics related to aquaculture. His primary areas of expertise are shrimp, crayfish, and oysters, on which he has taught formal courses and conducted research for 30 years. He has also been very much involved in damage control after the disastrous 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico; in fact, he is still working intensely on a $2.7 million, threeyear project to monitor the oil’s potential effect on coastal fish species. He is looking at whether oil shows up in the flesh of these species—and so far, it’s good news. The oil is not showing up at all right now, Rouse says.

From his early work as a marine biologist, hopping aboard shrimp boats at every turn, to becoming the first-ever director of the School of Fisheries, 109 Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Rouse admits his 42 total years working in fisheries have been demanding. Yet the experiences have all been rewarding on some level, he says, especially the teaching and international development components.

Oyster Renaissance 110

by B il l Wa lton and Dan Petrolia

Branding Premium Gulf Oysters

I

n December 2012, diners at the Lakewood Country Club in Point Clear, Alabama, enjoyed a complimentary feast of oysters provided by researchers Dan Petrolia of Mississippi State University (MSU) and Bill Walton of Auburn University. The oysters came from all over the country—some wild, some farmed, some generic, some branded—with a wide range of price points. Diners were asked to indicate which oysters they would be most and least likely to purchase if they were in a restaurant considering these oysters at these prices.

The goal of this ongoing Mississippi–Alabama Sea Grant-funded study is to determine whether diners in the southeastern United States and around the country will pay a premium for branded high-quality Gulf oysters.

“Imagine you’re going to go buy a car,” Petrolia says. “You have your own personal top five things you’re going to look for—the color, the gas mileage, the whatever. We are trying to identify the top four or five things people look for in an oyster

—hence, price, the name or brand, taste, what they look like.”

The Eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica, native to the Gulf and East coasts, tends to come from one of three sources. Natural oysters grow and reproduce in the wild with little to no human

intervention and are harvested by commercial fishermen and lease holders who manage private grounds. The vast majority of natural oysters come from the Gulf of Mexico. Lumped together as “Gulf oysters,” they bring the lowest price wholesale. In contrast, farmed oysters are cultivated in baskets in private waters and typically branded with a name that generates a premium price in restau111 rants around the country. Similarly, managed wild oysters can be harvested from a specific geographical area (and are often hand-selected), such as Galveston Bay in Texas or Apalachicola Bay in Florida, where the oysters are also branded for name recognition. They too fetch a higher price than generic Gulf oysters.

The question, however, is whether consumers, both regionally and in other parts of the country, are willing to pay for farmed and/or branded oysters from the Gulf. “One hypothesis is that people like a nice, pretty, uniform set of oysters in front of them,” Petrolia says. “The cultivated oysters tend

112

to all be roughly the same size and shape, while the wild-caught can vary widely in appearance.”

Walton notes that there has been an “oyster renaissance” in the United States, and that oysters marketed along the Atlantic Coast sell under regional names such as Wellfleets (from Cape Cod), Blue Points (Long Island), Chincoteagues (Virginia), and Beausoleils (New Brunswick).

Southern oysters, however, have typically been sold as generic oysters. Rowan Jacobsen, author of A Geography of Oysters: The Connoisseur’s Guide to Oyster Eating in North America, says this is “indicative of a region that pays less attention to the nuances of different raw oysters than to their culinary possibilities.”

The only larger scale exception on the Gulf Coast is Apalachicola oysters, which comprise the bulk of Florida’s oyster harvest. Although there is no clear evidence that they sell at a premium, it is evident that a market has developed for these branded oysters. Petrolia and Walton wanted to find out if there is a market for similarly branded oysters from other parts of the Gulf of Mexico.

At the Point Clear taste test, and a similar event in Houston in February 2013, participants were served different combinations of oysters in four rounds. The first two rounds were blind. They were given a price point, but nothing else. The generic

Gulf oysters at a significantly lower cost fared very well in the blind test, getting 41 percent of the vote based on taste and price. In the final two rounds, tasters were told the brand or point of origin of the oysters. Here, voters showed a clear geographical preference: the four branded oysters from Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Florida together received 45 percent of the vote, while voters shied away from the East Coast brands when they were aware of the oysters’ origin.

After the taste-test portion of the event, diners were given a questionnaire regarding their feelings on issues such as price point, brand, and geographical origin. The ultimate goal is to develop an online questionnaire to survey a wide crosssection of national consumers regarding their preferences when selecting oysters at restaurants.

Petrolia and Walton have contracted with a marketing company to recruit a representative sample of consumers of raw oysters from the five Gulf states, as well as from major metropolitan cities such as Chicago and New York, to determine the factors, including perceptions of risk, that go into oyster choice nationally. The two have created an advisory board of industry professionals to help design the survey with the intent of being able to hand the professionals helpful, real-world data when the project is complete.

“The results of the survey will help us tailor our production characteristics and marketing techniques to enable us the best chance of penetrating and competing in many high-value markets currently unavailable to Gulf oyster products,” notes Chris Nelson, vice-president of Alabama’s Bon Secour Fisheries. “An attribute as simple as ‘saltiness’ may be of much greater importance than we realize at this point, and ‘Gulf ’ vs. ‘Pepper Grove’ may market completely differently.”

Walton, a fisheries specialist, has spent years studying the science of oyster aquaculture. He thinks that the Gulf Coast fisheries industry is missing out on a potential economic driver by not cultivating and branding oysters in addition to harvesting what’s already there. He believes a market exists for higher-price-point “boutique” Gulf oysters not only in the region but in larger cities around the nation. He speculates the oysters will do well in cities like Boston and Chicago, and

plans to hold a similar restaurant event in Chicago to test his theory.

“We already know that there are consumers who are willing to pay a higher price for a premium oyster,” Walton says, adding that Gulf oysters have an advantage in the winter months because the oysters harvested out of the Northeast can be relatively “skinny” due to a seasonal lack of food in the water. “The oysters out of the Gulf are fat, plump— you get a lot of oyster in the shell. That looks really good in comparison to some of the oysters coming out of the more northern climates. On a raw bar in the colder months, our product really stands out.”

Walton’s expertise, combined with that of Petrolia, an agricultural economist at MSU, will go 113 toward defining the attributes that oyster consumers look for when purchasing in general, along with identifying specific regional and national interest in branded Gulf oysters. This information will be useful to everyone, from those who harvest wild oysters or cultivate their own to distributors to the restaurant industry itself, but particularly to industry professionals in the Gulf states who might be missing out on an economic opportunity.

(The Mississippi–Alabama Sea Grant Consortium contributed to this story.)

Oyster Safety for Oyster Fans 114

B y C ova A r i a s (with Jacqueline Kochak)

AU Lab Works to Keep Producers in Business and Consumers Healthy

M

ost people can down the succulent, slippery morsels of oysters by the dozens without ill effect, but people with liver disorders, diabetes, and immune-compromising conditions such as HIV/AIDS are at risk of developing a the deadly illness caused by a species of Vibrio bacteria.

Individuals who take prescribed medication to decrease stomach acid or who have had gastric surgery are also at risk.

Vibrio vulnificus, a gram-negative bacteria that occurs naturally, especially in brackish, warm coastal Gulf of Mexico waters, causes a particularly horrific illness in vulnerable individuals—and the mortality rate hovers at 50 percent. Some 95 percent of all seafoodrelated deaths in the United States are caused

by V. vulnificus, and the Centers for Disease Control reports that from 1996 until 2006 Vibrio infections increased by 78 percent.

The bacterium causes an average of 32 illnesses each year, and about half of those cases lead to

a painful death. That’s a high enough total to cause the seafood industry and the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) to pay attention.

The obvious solution to the problem would seem to be educating at-risk oyster eaters about the danger they’re courting. The Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC)—a coalition of shellfish industry members and state and federal regulatory agencies—launched an expensive information campaign aimed at doctors and restaurants, with the idea of educating high-risk individuals about the dangers of eating raw or undercooked oysters.

It didn’t work. Apparently, those who love the briny taste of raw, live oysters really love the briny taste of raw, live oysters. They’re willing to take the risk.

In 2009, FDA proposed requiring all oyster producers to use a form of post-harvest processing (PHP) to sterilize raw oysters. The seafood industry pushed back, insisting that requiring PHP

processes would drive many seafood companies out of business. That warning is not unrealistic because oyster harvesters are already under siege as a result of degradation of the Gulf coastal environment and scourges like the oyster drill, a carnivorous marine snail that drills a hole in an oyster’s shell and sucks out the sweet innards.

Most oyster harvesters are small family opera115 tions, and they’ve already been decimated by oil spills in the Gulf. The nation’s richest oyster grounds have also been affected by a series of hurricanes lashing the region and flooding from the Mississippi River, which flushed a torrent of fresh water into the northern Gulf, reducing salinity.

More recently, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill tainted the brand name “Gulf Seafood,” despite all the testing conducted by state and federal agencies that deemed seafood from the affected areas safe.

The FDA’s plan would have required all oysters harvested from the Gulf of Mexico between May and October to be processed. PHP, however,

not only kills oysters—changing their taste and 116 texture—it is expensive for small operations.

Most don’t have the necessary capital to buy the equipment necessary to meet the proposed FDA regulations.

Avery Bates, vice-president of the Organized Seafood Association-Alabama, told the Associated Press that two-thirds of Alabama’s 50 “mom-andpop” oyster shops would close because of the costs associated with processing the oysters.

There must be a way to make eating oysters safer without decimating a struggling mom-and-pop oyster industry. Unexpectedly, research conducted in my lab at Auburn University could become central to the debate.

Depuration Since 2007, we have been studying a post-harvest process called depuration to eliminate Vibrio vulnificus from Gulf oysters. Depuration involves transferring shellfish from polluted waters to a controlled, cleaner aquatic environment, allowing them to “open” and eliminate contaminants themselves, thus reducing bacteria to low levels.

Mollusk depuration is common in Europe, where the process is used to eliminate microbes that proliferate in waters contaminated by fecal waste.

In the Unites States, depuration systems must be approved by the FDA and are used only in Massachusetts (clams), Maine (clams and oysters),

and Florida (clams). These depuration systems are utilized only in fecal-contaminated waters because depuration of pathogens that occur naturally— such as vibrios—has proven challenging.

Several studies have shown depuration’s potential for eliminating V. vulnificus. I did my undergraduate work with V. vulnificus in Spain, where the microbe is a problem for eel farmers but not a food safety issue. I realized depuration might be the only way to control V. vulnificus during summer months, when it’s more prevalent, while also keeping oysters alive for raw consumption.

We started out by constructing a flow-through tank system using seawater pumped in from the Gulf. The idea was that water flow would be uninterrupted and sufficient to remove feces and pseudo-feces as well as prevent recontamination.

Flow rate was maintained at 11 L/min for six days, and salinity and temperature were measured twice a day. V. vulnificus numbers in the oysters were enumerated at day zero, one, three, and six using the FDA Most Probable Number procedure We found depuration was successful—but only part of the time. Out of 11 depuration trials run in 2008–2009 using naturally infected oysters, we observed significant V. vulnificus reduction in only six.

During these preliminary trials, we modified some parameters to favor removal of the microbe

while still maintaining optimum physiological activity of the oysters, with salinity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen being the most significant parameters. For example, we tried cooling the incoming water to 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit) during depuration without observing a significant decrease in V. vulnificus numbers.

We also increased the water-flow rate and saw total clearance of V. vulnificus in oysters within six days. Unfortunately, this result could not be repeated consistently. All the oysters were collected from beds off Dauphin Island, a barrier island at the mouth of Mobile Bay. Why, we asked, was there such a high variability in depuration efficacy when oysters were collected from the same physical location with only a few months difference?

The answer appeared to be elegant in its simplicity. There was little variation in water temperature in our trials using seawater, but salinity fluctuated between 9.5 parts per thousand (ppt) and 30.1 ppt.

Remember, the northern part of the Gulf of Mexico is really a giant, brackish estuary fed by the Mobile and Mississippi rivers and whipped by storms that regularly dump fresh water into the ocean. Salinity can drop from 20 ppt to 0 ppt in less than a day.

V. vulnificus thrives in brackish, but not too salty, water, and the main difference in V. vulnificus numbers between the Atlantic Coast and the Gulf

Coast during the warm summer months can be attributed to differences in salinity. Since we were using pumped-in seawater, we tried adding a brine solution to the water to keep salinity high. Adding brine to incoming saltwater is too expensive, however, to provide a long-term solution for oyster harvesters.

So we tried using artificial seawater instead, continuously circulating in the tank with a UV light sterilizer and an ammonia removal media filter to get rid of the toxic ammonia excreted by oysters as a waste product. We set up three tanks with different salinity levels for comparison and then went to work.

For a post-harvest method to be approved by FDA, a 3-log difference has to be demonstrated.

For example, 13,000 colony-forming units (CFUs) per gram of oysters would have to be brought down to less than 30. The higher the salinity, we observed, the lower the number of CFUs. We needed to then prove that the concept worked consistently. We carried out four trials in 2012, using different salinities (15, 25, and 35 ppt).

Our data showed that when salinity was at 35 ppt, the numbers of V. vulnificus decreased by at least three orders of magnitude in two (out of four) trials. Depuration at this salinity was able to reduce V. vulnificus levels below the FDA requirement

of less than 30 MPN/g. Oysters tolerated the depuration conditions with very low mortality (<1 percent), although their condition index decreased during depuration (14 days). Oysters were not fed during that time, but this is something that we can change in the future. In addition, depuration was effective at day 10, and prolonged times did not increase depuration efficacy. Hence, high-salinity depuration is a promising method to reduce V. vulnificus in oysters while maintaining a live, fresh product.

Because depurated oysters are still alive, the taste differs only because they are slightly saltier. As noted, FDA-approved post-harvest techniques— freezing, heat-cool pasteurization, exposure to 117 high hydrostatic pressure, and irradiation—kill the oyster and change the taste and texture, except for rarely used irradiation.

Cold Shock The Gulf Oyster Industry Council estimates that only 10 percent of oysters currently undergo PHP, and oystermen usually use refrigeration to preserve live oysters. That is why a major focus of my lab also has been “cold shock,” the response of bacteria to cold. What mechanisms allow V. vulnificus to adapt to cold, and what risk does this pose to consumers?

The optimal temperature for V. vulnificus is 35 degrees Celsius (95 degrees Fahrenheit), not uncommon during summer on the Gulf Coast. Most of the Gulf oystermen have small boats without refrigeration on board, so they go out for a short time and return to refrigerate their catch.

To study cold shock in V. vulnificus, we created a microarray to evaluate the expression of every one of V. vulnificus’ 4,488 genes at three different temperatures. We confirmed that when taking oysters down to 7 degrees Celsius (44.6 degrees Fahrenheit), the microbes’ proliferation is stopped.

In fact, something major happens around 10 degrees Celsius (50 degrees Fahrenheit). That 118 seems to be the threshold temperature where genes start turning on and the microbe gets into gear to handle cold.

When we lowered the temperature to 4 degrees Celsius (39.2 degrees Fahrenheit) instead of 7 degrees Celsius, the bacteria were no longer metabolically active, so our recommendation would be to keep oysters at 4 degrees Celsius.

We found, however, that if you take oysters down to 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit), leave them for several hours and then go down to 7 degrees Celsius, you can have problems. In that gap between 7 degrees Celsius and 15 degrees Celsius, the bacteria not only

continue to grow, they also adapt to the cold and can even proliferate.

Hydrostatic High-Pressure Treatment Although it seems few oystermen opt for a PHP method, one of the most popular PHP methods is hydrostatic high-pressure (HHP) treatment. At the behest of a commercial seafood processor and distributor, we compared HHP-treated oysters to flash-frozen oysters and oysters kept raw at 4 degrees Celsius. We repeated the testing in the winter, the summer, and the fall.

HHP-treated oysters are supposed to have a shelf life of 21 days, and we found HHP treatment indeed eliminated the majority of human pathogens in oysters, at first reducing them to non-detectable levels. The bacteria that remained adapted rapidly and thrived under refrigeration, however, and after one week the HHP-treated oysters had more bacteria than the week-old raw oysters. In fact, I have rarely seen bacteria levels so high—but the good news is that oysters aren’t kept that long.

HHP-treated oysters are certainly very safe, but they don’t seem to have a very long shelf life.

Another species of vibrio, V. parahaemolyticus, infects oysters in the Gulf as well as in the cooler northern waters of the Pacific, from California to Alaska. Depending on the year, and on the salinity

and temperature of the water, there may be more V. parahaemolyticus than V. vulnificus in oysters from Alabama’s Dauphin Island.

The Centers for Disease Control estimates vibriosis caused by V. parahaemolyticus causes some 4,500 illnesses annually. We have run a few depuration trials to see if increased salinity affects V. parahaemolyticus. As expected, high-salinity depuration was not as effective in removing V. parahaemolyticus as it was in reducing V. vulnificus, but an average of 2-log reduction was observed, which make us optimistic about using depuration to reduce both pathogens.

Development of a high-salinity depuration system to reduce pathogenic vibrios in Gulf oysters will promote a struggling industry and reassure millions of oyster-eaters that they can eat the raw delicacy with confidence. There is regional interest in developing intensive oyster aquaculture, so oyster farmers also would benefit tremendously. Most important, a reliable, economical oyster depuration system would save lives.

A version of this article first appeared in the Journal of Applied Microbiology.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

P

eople who really love oysters are willing to risk illness to enjoy them. Research on bacteria control is helping reduce that risk.

119

P

R

OFI

L

E

Chef Rob McDaniel

Simple Taste

by Amy Weaver

120

Auburn’s hotel and restaurant management program honored Rob McDaniel, chef at Alexander City, Alabama’s SpringHouse Restaurant, as the department’s outstanding alumnus at the 2012 Hospitality Gala. They were on to something, because a few months later—in early 2013—McDaniel was named a semifinalist for the prestigious James Beard Foundation Best Chef South award. A James Beard award is considered the highest honor in the food and beverage industry, and the Auburn graduate is believed to be the first alum of Auburn’s HRMT program to receive the honor.

The SpringHouse opened in 2009 high atop a hill near scenic Lake Martin. As both manager and executive chef, McDaniel is passionate about both southern cooking and about supporting local farmers, and he has built a reputation for serving a sophisticated menu made with fresh, local ingredients. McDaniel has a simple food philosophy—use amazing ingredients and let

them shine. Where other chefs gain notoriety for complicated creations with multiple ingredients, McDaniel exercises his culinary prowess as a minimalist. He prefers to take a good piece of tuna from the Gulf of Mexico and heirloom tomatoes from Waverly, Alabama, and make a great dish with very little else.

The restaurant’s signature dessert, for example, is a twist on a favorite campfire treat—s’mores.

The Alabama Tourism Department’s “Year of Alabama Food” campaign touts the dessert as one of the state’s “famous foods,” describing a grahamcracker base, made-from-scratch marshmallows, and a topping of dark-chocolate lava cake, “oozing with chocolate sauce and topped with more homemade marshmallows.”

Customers know about McDaniel’s simple culinary style and flock to SpringHouse. But they are not alone in noticing his skill in the kitchen.

In 2011, McDaniel’s former boss, Chris Hastings, owner of Hot and Hot Fish Club in Birmingham, asked McDaniel to accompany him on an episode of Food Network’s “Iron Chef America.” With a former chef de cuisine at Hot and Hot Fish Club, the trio faced off against a masterful Iron Chef, Bobby Flay—and won.

McDaniel, a native of Haleyville, Alabama, says he wanted to be a chiropractor, like his grandfather,

when he first enrolled at Auburn University.

But fate stepped in, and he changed course. It was one of those “a-ha” moments when the light bulb comes on. McDaniel was working his first restaurant job at a Ruby Tuesday’s. It was a home football weekend on the Plains, so the kitchen was slammed.

“We were rocking and rolling, but I stopped for a split second and smiled and then said to myself, ‘this is it,’” he recalls.

About the same time, McDaniel learned he had failed anatomy for the third time, and the light bulb flickered once again.

“I would have made a horrible chiropractor,” he admits.

McDaniel’s choice to major in hotel and restaurant management at Auburn was further supported by the words of Horst Schulze, the longtime president of the Ritz Carlton Hotel Company and founder of Atlanta-based West Paces Hotel Group. Schulze, who is legendary in the hospitality industry, serves on the College of Human Science’s advisory board and as an adviser to the hotel and restaurant management program, which is part of the college’s Department of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Hospitality Management.

“He said something that had profound meaning to me: ‘If you go to work every day for a

paycheck, you’re going for the wrong reason,’” McDaniel recalled. “After that, going to work had a different meaning.”

In a partnership with the college, West Paces Hotel Group offers hotel-as-classroom instruction for Auburn students with practicum classes designed to provide hands-on experience in all facets of hotel and restaurant operation. Company executives and guest lecturers in the classroom, the hotel, and off-campus venues provide classroom theory that is supported with practical experience, giving McDaniel solid preparation for his future career.

While studying hotel and restaurant management, McDaniel also earned money by cooking at Auburn’s Amsterdam Café for a stint before graduating from Auburn in 2002 and moving to Montpelier, Vermont, to study the culinary arts at the New England Culinary Institute.

“It wasn’t until I moved that I really fell in love with food,” he says. “I mean, I liked to cook food, but while in culinary school, I learned the importance of making a connection with the food, knowing the farmer or the fisherman, and knowing the difference in cooking foods in their proper season.”

Before graduating from NECI, McDaniel worked for Chef Johnny Earles at Criolla’s in

Grayton Beach, Florida. In 2004, he returned to Alabama to be sous chef under Hot and Hot Fish Club’s Chris Hastings, who the Year of Alabama Food website calls one of “Alabama’s Nationally Recognized Chefs” and who won the 2012 James Beard Foundation Best Chef South award.

After three years, McDaniel’s culinary path led him to serve as chef at Jim ’N Nick’s Bar-B-Q, also in Birmingham. There he joined another celebrity chef, Nick Pihakis—also a James Beard Foundation semifinalist in 2013. For the fourth consecutive year, Pihakis was vying to be named best restaurateur in the South.

McDaniel crossed paths with Hastings again when Hastings was called in as culinary adviser for the new Lake Martin restaurant being planned as the centerpiece of the Russell Crossroads development. Hastings and his wife, Idie, also a restaurateur, had a hand in everything from designing the dining room and choosing the tableware to planning the menu and training the staff. Hastings, in turn, hired McDaniel—and the rest, as they say, is history.

121

In Search of the Authentic 122

By Karen Hunley

O’Neill Keeps Local Flair Alive

D

r. Martin O’Neill, head of the Department of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Hospitality Management at Auburn University, doesn’t ask for a whole lot out of a dining experience. It might be hard to imagine, but until recently, one of the Ireland native’s favorite restaurants was a hole-in-the-wall fish and chip restaurant in Belfast in Northern Ireland, with grime so thick on the windows you couldn’t see inside and “a wall of smoke and grease” that hit you when you opened the door. He would give his order of deep-fried pork sausage, egg, and chips—a “heart attack waiting to happen”—to a rough-looking waitress with a cigarette hanging from her mouth.

He loved the simple, authentic experience—the food was uncomplicated and delicious, and the staff had mastered their menu, he says. Not long

O’Neill and Dale Katechis, founder and owner of Oskar Blues Brewery in Colorado, shake hands over an academic partnership for the graduate certificate program in Brewing Science and Operations.

ago, however, O’Neill returned to the restaurant to find that the place was cleaned up—unrecognizable. Not a bad thing if it hadn’t also “cleaned up” its version of his favorite dish.

“They no longer cooked it in lard—they cooked it in oil, and it just wasn’t the same,” he said.

Basically, the diner had changed its image and overcomplicated what it had done so well before, breaking one of O’Neill’s mantras that food should be very simple. Of course, attempting to make a dish more nutritious is commendable, he says, but taste and tradition shouldn’t be sacrificed in the process.

In the last several years, O’Neill’s research has centered on how to keep deeply rooted culture and local flair alive in our dining experiences as our society migrates more toward convenient, microwave-ready meals—which really aren’t an “experience” at all.

O’Neill and a colleague, Dr. Abel Alonso of the University of Western Sydney in Australia, have

been particularly interested in southern foods and how not only to keep these food traditions alive in our own southern states, but how they can be used as a tourist attraction and a socioeconomic development tool.

“Alabama actually offers world-class food products—we try to get that out,” he says. “It’s a serious matter both economically and socially.

“We always seem to be talking about the negatives (of Southern cuisine), and I am very passionate about looking at the other side of that fence.”

In one of their latest research projects, Food Culture in the Southern United States: Preserving Traditional Foods or Slow Death?, O’Neill and his co-authors name dishes such as potato-chip chicken casserole, grilled catfish with strawberry salsa, shrimp Creole, sour cream potato salad, and chocolate pecan pie as a few examples of classic Southern cuisine that could really please the palate of anyone, anywhere—not just in the South (Alonso et al. 2011).

123

124

O’Neill pulls a bottle off the line during a recent visit to New Belgium Brewery in Colorado.

But even Southerners don’t always give local cuisine enough credit, or at least, they seem to be limited in the variety of dishes they choose, the research data showed. While fried chicken was an overwhelming favorite in one sample group, traditional sides like collard greens, black-eyed peas, and creamed corn were surprisingly not as popular as one might think. The fundamental objective of this research project was to gauge southern consumer attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge of typical southern fare to ultimately encourage more interest in local foods, as little has been reported in this area of academic food culture research (Alonso et al. 2011).

Muscadine grapes are another southern U.S. food that many Alabamians seem to have little or no experience with, despite the produce’s deep southern roots and reported health benefits, O’Neill said. He found that, overall, there is a sense of cultural detachment regarding consuming muscadines or their by-products (wine, jams) with regard to harvesting, picking, and eating them. While the evocative image of children and adults alike plucking muscadines from the vine on hot summer days may still be present among older generations, that classic southern activity is either fading or completely unfamiliar to younger people, he said.

“They’re a good thing to eat, with so many antioxidants,” O’Neill says. “And when a food is so steeped in culture, you try to make people understand the importance of not letting go of food traditions.” Fostering more interest in muscadine grapes and other foods that reflect the South’s interesting agricultural background would also help the South capture the attention of other regions as a culinary tourism destination, he says.

So why aren’t Southerners more interested in their own local food products? O’Neill says it comes down, mostly, to economics—particularly in the case of his restaurant selection research,

AU’s Julie Howe, home-brewing legend Charlie Papazian, Prof. Curtis Bird, and O’Neill at the Great American Beer Awards.

which was conducted during the U.S. financial crisis of 2008. Restaurants that offer dishes composed of fresh, local ingredients tend to be more expensive. Also, many residents are simply unfamiliar with the rich variety of foods that come straight from southern soils and wildlife.

“It is hard for people to take risks and step out of their comfort zone,” he says. Fortunately, Auburn’s own alumni from the Department of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Hospitality Management have done a lot to educate fellow Southerners about “food outside the safe zone,” O’Neill says. For example, 2002 graduate Rob McDaniel is the executive chef at SpringHouse Restaurant in Alexander City, Alabama, where local ingredients are the focus of each dish. (See profile of McDaniel.)

The menu items at SpringHouse—and any favorite restaurant of O’Neill’s—aren’t fussy and overcomplicated. They are fresh, high quality, and carefully cooked.

“I like simple things prepared well,” he says.

O’Neill’s emphasis on southern food culture developed after he moved to Auburn—his first time living in the United States—but food quality has been particularly important to him since he was an undergraduate at the University of Ulster in the U.K. At that time, he worked as a chef for both catering companies and a variety of bistros

O’Neill with Auburn students on the annual European Food Tour.

as he made his way through college. He eventually earned three degrees and remained at Ulster for six years to teach hospitality and tourism. He then joined the faculty at Edith Cowan University in Perth, Australia. In 1999, O’Neill visited Auburn for the first time while collaborating on a research project with Bill Kent, then hotel and restaurant

management program director, and met other faculty members through that collaboration, including the dean of the College of Human Sciences, June Henton. Impressed by the program and the southern hospitality that was so reminiscent of the culture in Ireland, he became interested in joining the faculty. He interviewed in 2001, but initially turned down the offer because of 9/11. Dean Henton later made the offer again, and he joined the College of Human Sciences in 2003.

He soon became immersed in southern food traditions and research that would help promote Alabama as a culinary tourism destination. “It’s a nice story to investigate and to let others know about on an international scale,” O’Neill adds.

So with all his knowledge about local foods and strong opinions about keeping foods simple, what is O’Neill’s restaurant of choice in Auburn? Little Italy Pizzeria, located downtown on Magnolia Avenue. Maybe it’s not traditional southern fare, but “they do that pizza thing very well,” he says. It goes back to the restaurant’s ability to keep recipes simple and stick with what they know.

“At Little Italy, everything is made fresh and it’s not overcomplicated. They are not confused about why they are there and what they do best.”

125

The (Local) Food Network 126

By Stephen Pierce

GIS Project Links Restaurants and Farmers

E

ating locally produced food has become popular all over the United States. As a result, restaurants are advertising their food as prepared from locally produced products to entice customers. But this is not simply a trend that will come and go, such as trends in fashion. Producing and consuming local food products used to be the way of life, and people everywhere are realizing the significance of this valuable practice.

Over the last several decades, this practice slowed down and even diminished in many communities because of the increase and expansion of major corporations and large food vendors as well as the convenience of using these businesses. But in the last decade or so, the use of local food networks has been on the rise again.

This can be attributed to the availability of information and knowledge about local food networks, the ease of obtaining this information, and the public’s growing desire for sustainability.

Background: Becoming Sustainable Sustainability is an important, prevalent topic in the news and in politics, in education and among businesspeople. As defined by Auburn University, sustainability is “meeting human needs now and in the future in a fair, equitable, and socially just manner, and in a way that protects and maintains healthy ecosystems in perpetuity.” This definition

explains the need to find and exhibit the best ways to continue our lives and help maintain the earth for future generations. Everybody has an effect on the earth, whether it is good or bad, and it is our responsibility to do what is good.

There is an increased awareness of the need to be sustainable. Sustainability is not an issue that can be simply addressed by a single discipline of study, 127 but rather it has to be addressed from several areas of education to be efficient. Through my undergraduate studies, I was able to address sustainability. More specifically, I focused my research on a practice that has become widely popular around the world to help local communities become more sustainable both environmentally and economically. This practice is the production and consumption of food products in our own communities, also known as creating a local food network.

I am a recent Auburn University graduate with a degree in interdisciplinary studies in business and geography—and years of valuable experience

working with food. I have held various restaurant positions over the last several years, but cooking at restaurants such as Amsterdam Café and Maestro 2300, both in Auburn, has been my primary job 128 and has inspired my interest in food. I have always loved trying different types of foods and enjoyed experiencing the unique ways other people prepare and cook meals. Working for brilliant chefs who focus their cooking styles on using local and seasonal products has strengthened my interest.

are often used as a resource of information for various research studies. My database consists of various maps that I created using geographic information systems (GIS) computer software.

The maps depict Lee County and the surrounding counties that are home to farmers who provide produce to Lee County. My geospatial database also includes compiled lists of these farmers and their information, such as the farm address, phone number, and food items they produce. I also have lists of 12 locally owned restaurants in Lee County.

To create my database, I needed to complete the following objectives: • obtain information on what products/producers are available for Lee County, such as local farmers, farmer’s markets, community gardens, and family producers; and

Creating a Local Food Network

• obtain information on who is going to buy and consume these products, such as restaurants, cafés, and hotels.

One of the major objectives of my senior thesis project was to create a geospatial database of farmers who provide food to Lee County and local restaurants. A geospatial database is a collection of information that is used to store data about a specific area, and these databases

Lee County is deficient in this information, so creating a geospatial database demonstrated that the resources exist in the county to support a local food network. I hope it will help persuade community citizens to participate in establishing a solid local food network.

To begin establishing enough information to help educate the community about local food networks, I had to find out who needed the information and what information needed to be provided.

I personally visited 12 different restaurants in Lee County and interviewed their chefs or managers about their use of locally produced food items and their potential these items. Additionally, I interviewed the market managers at the Opelika Main Street Farmers’ Market and the Market at Ag Heritage Park at Auburn University. While I was at the farmer’s markets, I spent time talking with the farmers about my research and their opinions about using locally produced food items in local restaurants.

Local restaurants are critical for helping create a local food network. They provide the community with opportunities to eat a variety of different products, and although many of these food products are produced at farms and gardens right here in Lee County, some local restaurants buy products from corporate food vendors that obtain products from locations all across the country. Buying from large food vendors can be cheaper and more convenient, because they consistently have almost every fruit and vegetable you might need, and they can deliver your whole supply order to the restaurant at one time.

Establishing a strong local food network would provide these restaurants with the necessary information and accessibility to use local food producers. Many restaurants want to work with local producers but may not know how or where to find them. That is why the main goal of my thesis project was to provide a link between restaurants and local producers through the database.

My research contains data on more than 40 Lee County farmers who produce more than 50 different food products in Lee County. The data includes the farmers’ names, addresses, contact information, the farmers’ market at which they sell, and the food products they sell. I have provided this list to several of the restaurants included in my research, which creates a convenient way for restaurants to incorporate more menu items made with locally produced foods, find products they need, and access the necessary information to buy these products. In addition, using a geospatial database in particular allows consumers and producers to target the transactions within specific geographic ranges for maximum costeffectiveness. As assistant manager at Acre, a new Auburn restaurant that focuses on using local food products, I and the other staff utilize this database and put into practice the “farm-to-table” concept each day.

129

Food is one thing everyone can relate to, whether at celebrations or just an everyday meal with friends or family. It plays an important role in our society because we all need food to nourish our bodies, but for humans, food is much more than a way to sustain energy. Food is used as a way

to communicate with others and share memories.

This is another reason food is one of my passions, because I feel eating locally produced food not only gives the local economy a boost and encourages sustainability, but it is also a healthy, tasty way to enhance the dining experience.

130

Perfect Match

B y B et h Wa lton, D e ac u e F ie l d s, a n d L a D o n S wa n n

Website Helps Public Find Just What It Needs Within Food Industry

O

nline matchmaking not only connects people to one another, but now it can find their ideal food “match.” MarketMaker is a free, searchable online database of fishermen, farmers, restaurants, chefs, processors, wholesalers, retailers, farmer’s markets, and others working in the food industry. It provides the link between food producers and food consumers.

Nineteen states, plus the District of Columbia, currently participate in the MarketMaker network.

Alabama MarketMaker (al.foodmarketmaker.com) has been up and running since October 2011. The intent of the program is to increase both choices for consumers looking for Alabama-produced food and business opportunities for Alabama food producers large and small. For example, Dana Taylor

and her husband, Jason, are the owners of a small crab processing shop, Dana’s Seafood, in the fishing town of Bayou la Batre along Alabama’s coast.

Since registering with MarketMaker, Taylor has been able to connect her business with new customers, including a seafood buyer in Maryland and a new local seafood market in Mobile.

Participating in MarketMaker led the Taylors to create a Facebook account for Dana’s Seafood and prompted them to list Dana’s parents’ oyster business on MarketMaker.

“Having tools available like MarketMaker for me and my parents’ oyster business has been very helpful,” Taylor says.

Through the last few years, the local and sustainable food movement has gained more support and recognition across the country and in our own backyards. “Local has become a buzzword for restaurant menus, gourmet food stores, and catered event,” notes Maggie Lacey, manager of Windmill Market in Fairhope. “MarketMaker can

help businesses make the most of this new way of eating—and help consumers eat fresh and healthy food—by providing a quick online connection to one another.”

“Beth Walton, the outreach coordinator for Alabama MarketMaker, has been a great resource for me and helped put my products out where they might not have reached,” says Taylor.

The MarketMaker Resources MarketMaker website has many features for both consumers and producers, including a national buy-and-sell forum, a current listing of foods that are in season, links to online stores of Alabama MarketMaker businesses (such as Taste of Alabama), business spotlights, and market research information (food preference information and census data).

A MarketMaker business has the opportunity to create a free business profile that includes information about the company and its products, including

131

contact information, products for sale, social media links, hours of operation, and links to an online store. Photos can also be posted to the profile. This allows consumers and other businesses to find them online, generating additional business.

Alabama MarketMaker also has a mobile website (al.foodsearcher.com) that can be accessed from a smartphone. Consumers will be able to find businesses in the MarketMaker network within a 100-mile radius of their current location or zip code. FoodSearcher.com allows consumers to “map all businesses” to see the locations of all results, or map a particular business location. We are also working to develop more efficient use of Quick Re132 sponse (QR) codes to incorporate into the mobile MarketMaker website.

How We Market Alabama MarketMaker We market Alabama MarketMaker to businesses and consumers in various ways. For example, we have developed an informative brochure that targets both specialty crops producers and fishery operations, providing quick facts about MarketMaker, a QR code, a link to the website, and contact information for project personnel.

We have also been working closely with the National MarketMaker office’s information

technology team to provide a seafood portal to Alabama and Mississippi, which gives industry and consumers direct access to the seafood and charter boat sections of MarketMaker. This portal will allow us to more effectively promote MarketMaker by providing this link to our Seafood Marketing Commission and partners. We have provided an electronic database of farmer’s markets and provided a list of these markets for Baldwin and Mobile counties, where seafood is most likely to be sold. We also have provided an electronic database of state and federally inspected seafood processing plants.

We have developed a variety of marketing materials, such as brochures, fact sheets, training manuals, e-newsletters, and a completed tabletop display for trade and industry shows.

Alabama MarketMaker conducted workshops at fruits and vegetables meetings throughout Alabama during 2012 and 2013, including workshops in Auburn, Dothan, and Huntsville.

We have also educated 12 Alabama Cooperative Extension System regional agents on registering producers, searching the database for products, and understanding the benefits of marketing products through MarketMaker. These agents will be able to inform specialty crop producers and assist them with the registration process.

Market-Ready Training, a producer-training meeting in Clanton, Alabama, in September 2012, prepared producers for working with retail markets such as restaurants and grocery stores. We also held a workshop to train specialty crop producers on the requirements for supplying products to these retail markets.

What Factors Influence Profile Views?

On the research side, one of our graduate students conducted a study to determine what factors influence consumers’ views on business profiles featured on MarketMaker. Since it is difficult to quantify the impact of MarketMaker in terms of sales, consumer views on each business profile are counted as an alternative measure.

One of the most important factors found to impact consumer views is a business spotlight.

Results showed that consumers are more likely to view businesses featured on the MarketMaker webpage, especially businesses affiliated with a state or farm program. Profiles featuring a business website were also more likely to be viewed by consumers.

Factors such as social networks (Facebook and Twitter) had a positive impact on the number of profile views.

Some factors are specific to the type of business.

For agritourism businesses, we found that having

attractions, amenities, discounts, and year-round business hours all positively influenced the number of consumer views on a profile. Fisheries’ business profiles that described method-of-sale factors such as delivery and EBT were more likely to be viewed. Having a sponsor for a farmer’s market as well as being open year-round were the two most important factors influencing consumer views on a farmer’s market profile on MarketMaker.

Direct marketing channels were consistently important across all product categories (vegetables, fruits and nuts, meat, grains, and dairy). Results showed that profiles in each product category that featured a farmer’s market as a marketing channel were more likely to be viewed by consumers than any other marketing channel (such as a grocery store).

Overall, results regarding product forms for each of the product categories echoed the theme of consumers’ demand for convenience. That is, products that were already packaged and require minimum preparation time were most likely to influence consumers to revisit a profile.

Workshops We are working with the Alabama and Mississippi Cooperative Extension Systems and our Mississippi MarketMaker counterparts to conduct

workshops for producers that will present ways to incorporate social media and online resources like MarketMaker in their marketing efforts. By introducing food producers to free social media outlets like Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest, we will help link businesses’ MarketMaker accounts with these outlets to help further promote them via our own Facebook and Twitter.

Dr. LaDon Swann of the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture ans Aquatic Sciences (and director of the Mississippi—Alabama Sea Grant Consortium) and Dr. Deacue Fields of the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology were instrumental in obtaining external funding to launch Alabama MarketMaker.

Alabama MarketMaker’s partners and sponsors include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission (GSMFC), Auburn University, the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES), the Mississippi—Alabama Sea Grant Consortium, the Alabama Seafood Marketing Commission (ASMC), Alabama Farmers Federation (ALFA), the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries (AGI), the Alabama Sustainable Agriculture Network (ASAN), Boat People SOS-Gulf Coast, the Alabama Coastal Foundation (ACF), the Alabama Department of Conservation

and Natural Resources Marine Resources Division, the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH), Hampstead Institute, and EAT South.

133

Collaborating for Success 134

By David J. Ketchen, Jr .

How Franchising Feeds Restaurant Growth

I

n the 1950s, Americans were on the move like never before. A few years earlier, Dwight D. Eisenhower had been amazed by the ability of Germany’s Autobahn to move people and goods quickly over vast distances. After Ike was elected president, he led the United States into the modern era of transportation by building the interstate highway system. Suddenly, a family could cross several states in one day of driving.

Like any major infrastructure change, the building of the interstate system had some unintended consequences. One of the most important of these consequences involved food.

Every day, legions of hungry travelers needed a place to buy a meal, and many wanted a meal that was predictable. This created a huge opportunity for restaurant chains such as McDonald’s, Burger King, and Howard Johnson’s.

Mama Goldberg’s, which started in Auburn as a college hangout, is an example of a restaurant company using franchising as an expansion vehicle.

Meanwhile, a new form of entertainment— television—was beginning to grab consumers’ attention. Television commercials provide restaurant chains with the chance to advertise to a national audience and build a brand.

When a traveler pulled off an interstate exit and had a choice between a well-known name such as McDonald’s and local “mom and pop” establishments, the former usually was considered the safer option.

Many companies decided that franchising was the best way to meet these demands. In a franchising relationship, a franchisor (such as McDonald’s) lets franchisees operate stores under its brand name and using its processes. In return, franchisees pay the franchisor an upfront franchisee fee and an ongoing royalty fee. Because franchisees pay the costs of building their stores, using franchising allows modest-sized firms with big ambitions to grow much faster than they would by owning all the stores themselves.

Fast forward a few decades, and it is clear that franchising has been a huge success. According to the International Franchise Association, as of 2007 there were more than 800,000 franchised businesses in the United States that collectively accounted for more than 17 million jobs and $2.1 trillion in economic impact.

As the economic role of franchising has expanded, so has academic interest in the topic.

Franchising is complex because franchisors and franchisees are partners, but a high potential for tension and conflict between the two sides exists, too. This complexity gives rise to an array of interesting questions for business professors.

I have been studying franchising in general and restaurant franchises in particular since the 1990s. One of the resulting research articles has been cited by other authors more than 500 times.

Every spring, I teach a course on franchising as part of the Entrepreneurship and Family Business program in the College of Business. I also host

135

training seminars on franchising for disabled veterans through the Entrepreneurship Boot Camp for Veterans program that is held annually at Florida State University. Through this research and teaching, I have been able to contribute to broader efforts in the scholarly community.

An Appetizing Option: The Reasons Firms Franchise Offering franchises requires a company to make a risky move—allowing independent business owners to operate under the company’s banner. These franchisees might behave in ways that enhance the brand, but they also might harm the 136 brand. Despite this uncertainty, hundreds of companies begin offering franchises each year.

Research has identified a variety of explanations for the decisions that firms make about whether to franchise. Some firms franchise because they need the money. Dave Thomas, the founder of Wendy’s, was an orphan. When he decided to build the Wendy’s brand, he lacked the needed capital to build the stores himself. By relying on franchising, Thomas was able to expand Wendy’s from two stores to 1,400 in less than a decade.

Another reason to offer franchises is that franchisees are highly motivated to be successful.

The manager of a company-owned store will

typically be paid a salary and have opportunities to earn bonuses. If, in a given year, the store loses money or breaks even, the manager still makes a decent wage. In contrast, a franchisee is a “residual claimant,” which means that any money that remains after all the stores’ bills are paid goes directly into the franchisee’s wallet. If a franchisee’s store loses money or breaks even, the franchisee is left with nothing. On the other hand, if the store is wildly successful, so is the franchisee.

Given this motivation, it is not surprising that one study found that sales at franchisee-owned outlets were more than 80 percent higher than sales at company-owned outlets.

Two colleagues and I recently examined the role of “strategic resources” in franchising decisions.

Strategic resources are resources that other firms struggle to duplicate, such as Coca-Cola’s confidential formula, the brand-name reputation enjoyed by McDonald’s, and Kentucky Fried Chicken’s secret blend of herbs and spices. Because these resources are unique, they can help a firm stand out in the marketplace and be highly profitable.

We found that when franchisors and franchisees can create resources together—such as mutual trust—this encourages franchising. Without enlisting franchisees, a company simply cannot build such resources. In contrast, resources that the franchisor alone owns—such as strong brand names and secret formulas—do not encourage franchising. Companies expose these resources to risk when they franchise. In 2011, for example, 150 Subway franchisees put the company’s good name in jeopardy when they failed to set up their debit card scanners with the level of security that Subway had recommended. This led to tens of thousands of customers losing millions to electronic hackers.

Feast or Famine? The Franchisor– Franchisee Relationship The relationship between franchisors and franchisees is complicated. To an extent, the two

sides are partners. Each makes vital contributions to their shared success that the other would struggle to provide. The franchisor provides a brand, products, training, and ongoing support and advice to its franchisees. In turn, franchisees provide revenue in the form of franchise and royalty fees, and they offer a local presence for the brand. Because franchisees are small and nimble, they sometimes dream up creative innovations that the large franchisor might struggle to invent.

Although McDonald’s, for example, operates a sophisticated test kitchen at its corporate headquarters, several of the brand’s most successful products—including the Big Mac, the Egg McMuffin, and the Filet-o-Fish sandwich—have been created by individual franchisees.

Sometimes the interests of franchisors and franchisees are in conflict. Royalty fees, for example, are a big problem. Collecting a royalty as a percentage of profits would be dangerous for a franchisor because the franchisee could artificially inflate his expenses in order to give the appearance that no profits are being made. As a result, the vast majority of franchisors collect royalties as a percentage of a franchisee’s sales, often in the range of 4 to 6 percent.

Problem solved, right? Not exactly. Conflict arises because franchisees benefit most if their stores’

profits are maximized while the franchisor benefits if sales are maximized. Many fast-food franchisees dislike offering a dollar menu, for example, because their profit margins are very slim on these inexpensive items. In contrast, many franchisors like dollar menus because these items increase sales volume.

“Buy one, get one free” promotions are a similar source of tension—sales go up, which benefits the franchisor, but franchisees’ profit margins go down.

The desire to maximize profits also leads some franchisees to cut corners in ways that can harm the franchisor’s brand. All fast-food chains have specific expectations about product safety— prepared food must be discarded after a certain time period. From the franchisee’s point of view, however, keeping a cheeseburger under a hot lamp for two or three hours—instead of throwing it out after 20 minutes—helps her bottom line. This scenario is especially likely to unfold if the franchisee’s restaurant does not depend on repeat business, which is the case for many outlets that are located next to interstates.

A customer who eats this aged cheeseburger is likely to have a bad experience. Unfortunately for the franchisor, the customer has no idea that the bad burger came from a franchised restaurant.

All the customer knows is that a meal from a particular restaurant chain made her sick. She

137

Auburn’s Stacy Brown, founder of Chicken Salad Chick, is another recent franchising success.

is likely to avoid the chain in the future and tell her family and friends about her horrible meal.

In sum, the franchisor’s brand is harmed because some of the goals of the franchisor and the franchisee are different.

Franchisors have tools to combat this problem, such as unannounced inspections and secret shoppers, but the best solution is to build a spirit of collaboration and teamwork. Although the franchisor–franchisee relationship is complex, there is a simple truth that surrounds it: the better the two sides work together, the more successful and enduring their brand will be.

138

Cooking Up Franchising Success Baseball star Yogi Berra once noted that predictions are hard to make, especially about the future.

This aphorism holds true for the fate of franchised chains, but studies have uncovered some factors that may explain whether a chain will thrive or struggle. Much of this research has focused on the role of strategic resources.

The frequently cited study mentioned earlier examined how restaurant chains reconcile competing influences and the implications of this reconciliation for performance. In particular, my co-author and I were interested in how restaurant chains would deal with a dilemma wherein a lack

of resources encourages them to franchise in order to grow (much like Dave Thomas did), but other elements of their situation make franchising unattractive. We found that firms confronting this difficult choice will indeed move forward with franchising. This harms their ability to be profitable in the short term but can position them for success in the future.

Although capitalizing on strategic resources is generally viewed as a means to improve a firm’s performance, in a recent study, my colleagues and I found the opposite. Specifically, we examined restaurant chains’ efforts to convey specialized knowledge about their restaurant concept to franchisees.

When knowledge is very specialized, working with franchisees actually hurts the chain’s performance.

This may explain why some firms with extensive menus such as The Cheesecake Factory own all of their own restaurants. Running one of these outlets is so complex that it is difficult to share all the necessary knowledge with a franchisee. In contrast, most of the information that is needed to master a simple business concept such as Subway can easily be captured in a handbook. Not surprisingly, Subway is relying exclusively on franchising to guide its current growth.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

O

ffering franchises requires a company to take a risk.

Franchisees might enhance a brandâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;or harm it.

139

140

Collaborating for Safety

By Christy Bratcher

Identifying Gaps in Local Food Systems

D

espite the wealth in the United States and the country’s abundance of agricultural resources, some households still suffer from food insecurity, or a lack of wholesome food. They do not have healthy, complete meals on the table each night, and their children may not be getting the nutrition that’s important for proper growth and development. Rising costs of production and increasing prices for farm products are causing this hardship for the most vulnerable, who most often live in rural areas and depend on agriculture for food and income.

Encouraging the growth of local and regional food producers and processors will help revitalize rural economies and help lift the burden of food insecurity. However, local farmers selling directly to consumers, farmers’ markets, and small niche producers and processors may not have adopted

The Market at Ag Heritage Park on the Auburn University campus.

important food safety and security measures used by larger operators.

The project I am collaborating on, funded by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), is called “Identifying Gaps in Local Food Safety and Security System.” We are focusing on problem areas in food safety and security among local and regional animal producers, and then providing training programs to address knowledge gaps.

The five-year project, which began in 2013, also aims to justify consumer confidence in local and regional foods and, therefore, ensure producers’ economic viability. Consumers like knowing where the food on their plate originates and often believe these foods are the safer and higher-quality option. Recent recalls, however, of raw organic milk, organic eggs, and organic poultry—all from small producers—tell a different story.

For this project, we have already surveyed current practices utilized in small-farm distribution and direct vendor sales, and we have identified

gaps in best practices. In the remaining years of the project, we plan to • develop teaching modules to enable individual establishments to develop their own complete food safety programs; • develop food safety awareness practices and certification programs; • develop a Web-based information portal as a part of the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES) for use by local and regional suppliers, handlers, and consumers of local and regional foods; and • evaluate the impact on small and regional producers of implementing a food safety plan.

Researchers from Auburn University and Tuskegee University, which both have strong programs in agriculture, are collaborating on this project. We are leveraging involvement with three key organizations: the Auburn University

141

with farmers in other markets, with information about our training efforts spreading through word of mouth.

The university is also home to processing facilities where activities from harvesting to processing red meat, poultry, and eggs take place.

In addition, we have a biological level-2 pilot processing plant that can simulate food production, and various biological, chemical, and physical hazards can be introduced to study ways to eliminate those challenges.

Importance of Training 142

Food Systems Institute (AUFSI), Alabama Water Watch (AWW), and ACES. A strength of this project is that it includes professionals across a variety of disciplines who already work closely with producers, regional Extension specialists, commodity groups, allied industry representatives, governmental agencies, and elected officials. This comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach has rarely been used to help to improve the lives of small farmers or producers.

We are focusing on small farmers, processors, and vendors of animal products in the Southeast, where the numbers of small-farm direct-food-sales

vendors and processors, farmers markets, and niche markets are growing. In fact, the number of farmer’s markets has increased dramatically since a reporting system to track farmer’s markets began in 1994—from 1,755 to 6,132 today.

Auburn is the prime spot to carry out this project because of its geographic location within the Southeast, and I think many surrounding states will benefit. The university has a farmer’s market on campus during the summer, which was a great place to begin surveying farmers and implementing instruction modules. Gaining the trust of these farmers helped us develop relationships

Much emphasis has been placed on training those who handle our food supply, especially in the corporate segment of the industry, but awareness at the niche market level needs expanding. When consumers shop at large grocery chains, they can rely on inspections and regulations to ensure the safety of products, but this isn’t always true of products coming from local and regional producers and processors. Therefore, education is crucial to fill these small producers’ and processors’ knowledge gaps.

Programs such as Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP), Safe Quality Foods (SQF), and ServSafe and practices such as thirdparty audits and the preparation of food defense plans have made tremendous improvements in

both the safety and quality of our food supply, but similar programs have not been developed specifically for smaller direct-farm sales, farmerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s markets, and niche producers.

The good news is that many programs exist to serve as models for these local entities. For example, the Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) program, initiated in 1982, was widely adopted in a relatively short time. Since then, modules have been added, including a transportation module and a dairy BQA module (BQA, 2011). The program was designed for beef producers to address industry and government concerns about prohibited pharmaceutical residues in beef products to help producers satisfy consumers who desire wholesome, safe, convenient, and healthful meat products. The guidelines exceed USDA and FDA food safety requirements.

To ensure sustainability and transferability, we are studying existing training programs throughout the food industry to assess traineesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and facultyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attitudes toward the use of state-of-the-art technology versus non-traditional training.

Project Goals The first goal of the project was to identify gaps in knowledge and between knowledge and practice regarding food safety and security in the

production and distribution of local and regional foods. We surveyed the range and needs of current production, processing, and marketing practices of current small farmers in the Southeast who are selling their animal products locally or regionally.

Project team members as well as graduate and undergraduate students were involved in the datacollection portion of this project, which consisted of case studies and face-to-face interviews with red meat, poultry, egg, and dairy cooperators in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

Particularly in the Black Belt region of Alabama, livestock producers face unique food security challenges, including lack of enough land area, lack of financial resources, lack of knowledge on how to use their limited resources in an efficient way, lack of marketing of their products, and lack of knowledge about how to recover from natural disasters. Many of these small producers depend on the products from the farm for their own household consumption, as well as for their only source of income. So the needs assessment took their particular concerns into consideration.

At the same time, we also have been conducting consumer surveys to get the clearest picture possible of public perception of locally and regionally grown foods. The surveys were conducted in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia through a random-

143

dial phone system through government services.

By asking questions about what people think “local foods” really are, the geographic scope of “local,” attitudes on the safety of local foods, and desire to purchase them, we were able to better understand the disconnect with what consumers think they are getting when they buy locally and what we know they are getting. We knew we could not provide a safer food supply and reduce the cost of local and regional foods until we identified these gaps.

We have also already begun working toward the

144

second goal of the project: identifying gaps in food safety practices and developing best practices for production and distribution of local and regional foods. Specifically, we have identified potential microbial contamination and cross-contamination routes on farms during production and processing and throughout the supply chain by conducting microbial analyses for water run-off, soil/manure samples, and swab samples from process plants, transporting vehicles, and storage areas.

Collected data will be analyzed to determine

best practices, needs, and necessary steps to improve production and distribution of farm products. When this is completed, we will hold workshops for participating producers and other interested parties such as consumers and Extension agents to discuss results. In this phase of the project, we will also develop new detection methods or optimize existing accurate, fast, portable methods for farmers to consistently produce safe food.

Our third goal is to examine the effect of implementing these best practices on operations.

In addition to conducting an economic analysis, performing a qualitative analysis to assess perceptions regarding the implementations is almost important. Using a survey, information will be sought on demographic characteristics (e.g., age, gender, education), general participant characteristics (e.g., type of enterprise, acreage), and perceptions of practices and related economic issues (e.g., “Did the recommended practice improve your operations in terms of yield or returns?”).

The fourth and fifth goals are about making positive, long-term changes to local food safety and security. To meet our fourth goal, we want to develop pre-harvest and post-harvest food production and handling training, including food safety, marketing and traceability awareness practices, and certification programs, to ensure a safer and

more secure food supply in the Southeast. Best practices observed during the data-collection phase will be highlighted, participants’ concerns will be addressed, and the process of disseminating information will begin.

We also plan to create cross-disciplinary university course modules for food safety, marketing, and food traceability. The initial undergraduate curricula targeted by this proposal include Animal Science, Food Science, Poultry Science, and Hotel and Restaurant Management at Auburn University and Tuskegee University. This educational component will reach more than 500 undergraduate students over two years. Instructors on the collaborating team will be provided with teaching materials, possible test questions, and possible activities depending on the course. These curricula can then be adopted by other universities and colleges throughout the Southeast, potentially reaching thousands of other students training to enter the food industry.

Finally, our fifth goal is to develop a Web-based information portal for Southeastern food and farming industry operators. The portal will provide an overview of food production and handling plans as well as help operators create their own plan.

Since people everywhere can reach the portal with just a few clicks of the mouse, it will allow efficient

dissemination of our research and project results throughout the target area. Before developing the website, we plan to convert the university teaching modules into curriculum for “non-traditional learners”—farmers—and conduct Extension training courses tailored for this audience. Using the curricula assembled for these training modules, the portal will be developed to serve as a resource for training course participants, the trainers themselves, as well as those who were not able to attend the training. And, last, to ensure we are reaching everyone involved in local and regional food systems—from those who grow and process the food to those who serve and consume it—we will develop teaching modules for consumers; retail employees; and hotel, restaurant, and institutional employees. The modules will help them better understand the language used in food production.

Project Outcomes We anticipate that hundreds of local and regional food producers, industry trainers, students, food service employees, and consumers will be affected by our project through the next five years and aid in our ultimate goal of making local food systems in the Southeast safer and more secure. Specific outcomes include the following:

• A total of 150 undergraduate students will write food production, handling, safety marketing, and traceability plans for their employers (or potential employers) in the farm and food industry.

• A total of 100 training participants will adopt and implement food production, handling, safety marketing, and traceability plans for their own food or farming operations.

• A total of 20 regional trainers will serve as resource people concerning food production, handling, safety marketing, and traceability plans for the Southeast.

By connecting our team of food safety researchers to both farmers and consumers through this project and getting everyone on the same page about the expectations and realities of local food production, we can ultimately provide a safer food supply. This means also reducing the costs of local foods for those who depend on agriculture to both make their livelihood and feed their families.

145

Hunger Solutions Institute 146

B y Pau l a Hu n k e r , Harriet Giles, and June Henton

Connecting People and Ideas that Work

N

othing is more fundamental to the quality of life worldwide than having access to sufficient food. Not only is adequate nutrition a requirement for life itself, but there is unequivocal scientific evidence that being undernourished in the critical first 1,000 days of life can result in irreparable damage to normal growth and development. This not only limits the potential of affected individuals but also, ultimately, the communities and nations in which they live (Lancet 2008).

As an example, studies (Fernandez 2008) have shown that malnourished children in Latin America over the course of their lifetime earn 50 percent less than their peers who are well nourished. In addition, chronic hunger is one of the greatest detriments to a country’s ability to compete in the global marketplace. According to recent United Nations data, the cost of malnutrition to the global economy in lost productivity and direct health care accounts for as much as 5 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP) and,

in some instances, can cost up to 16 percent of a country’s gross national product (GNP). Yet the cost to solve this problem is relatively small. The World Bank estimates $10.3 billion a year in nutrition interventions in 36 countries with the highest burden of undernutrition would prevent more than

1.1 million child deaths, cut in half the prevalence of severe acute malnutrition, and leave 30 million fewer children stunted (Horton et al. 2009).

In the year 2000, the United Nations announced a global action plan for international development known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), a blueprint designed to improve the quality of life of the world’s most impoverished cit- 147 izens (UN GA 2008). Number one on the MDG list was to cut extreme hunger and poverty in half by 2015. Since the 2015 target date is rapidly approaching, it poses the question, “Are we making progress?” Fortunately, in the area of food security the overall answer is “yes,” although we still have a long way to go and many challenges yet to face.

According to data included in The State of Food Security (2013), an annual report compiled by the United Nations agencies focused on hunger, nutrition, and agriculture, the number of chronically hungry people worldwide in 2013 now stands at 842 million, a historic low that represents

148

a 17 percent decline since 1990-92. In fact, 38 developing countries have already been successful in cutting in half the proportion of chronically undernourished people, proving that ending hunger can be achieved with today’s advances in science, agriculture, technology, communication, and global food supply chains.

While 90 percent of the world’s hungry live in the developing world, it is important to remember that hunger exists in even the richest nations, and that vulnerable people everywhere can find themselves chronically hungry because of a natural disaster or financial crisis. In the United States alone, there has been a dramatic increase in hunger as a result of the 2008 financial downturn. Because of the economy’s sluggish recovery, according to the most recent USDA statistic we still have nearly 50 million Americans, 16 million of whom are children, who are food insecure, despite being one of the most prosperous countries on earth (USDA).

Accelerating Auburn’s War on Hunger To address the hunger challenge locally and globally, the College of Human Sciences and the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station established the Hunger Solutions Institute (HSI) at Auburn University in February 2012. Leveraging the foundation of Auburn’s War on Hunger,

the institute serves as a convener, collaborator, and multiplier and works in four distinct ways: • Emphasizes human sustainability: Founded within the disciplines of the human sciences, the HSI is human-centric, ensuring that the comprehensive sustainability model from which it operates keeps the health and well-being of people as its central focus.

• Connects knowledge with practice: The HSI is dedicated to aggregating and disseminating the latest knowledge, research, and best practices to those addressing hunger locally and globally.

• Empowers communities: Although solutions are pursued at every level, the HSI emphasizes solutions from the frontlines of hunger that can be community owned, operated, and sustained.

• Creates multi-sector partnerships: The HSI’s research and outreach strategy is to create knowledge coalitions, representing all academic disciplines, and leverage them with the strength of partners from the public and private sectors in the battle against hunger.

Partnering with international organizations such as the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), as well as a number of other non-

government organizations (NGOs), government organizations, foundations, and institutions, the Hunger Solutions Institute is working on several initiatives and programs, outlined below.

the need for landlines in developing countries.

This project, congruent with the White House challenge to Power Africa, will do just that, community by community.

Power for Life

Universities Fighting World Hunger

The HSI Power for Life initiative addresses what may be the single biggest obstacle to development—the absence of electricity.

Most attempts to reduce hunger and poverty in developing countries must face the fact that little or no electrical power is reliably available in these locations; in sub-Saharan Africa, 95 percent of rural farmers do not have it (WHO 2009).

The HSI proposes to deliver clean, renewable, biomass heat and electrical power technology at the community level, with a special emphasis on women, who bear a disproportionate burden of providing fuel for their families.

This energy source will enable the use of modern technology, ranging from community food storage to computers in village schools, and dramatically improve food security, nutrition, health, and education without waiting another generation for governments to provide access to a national electrical grid. Affordable communitylevel electricity is a transformative intervention, similar to cell phone technology, which bypassed

Universities Fighting World Hunger is a coalition of higher education institutions that is mobilized to fight hunger and make its eradication a core value on campuses around the globe.

The movement began in 2004 when Auburn was invited by the United Nations World Food Programme to be its lead partner in a student War on Hunger campaign. Auburn accepted the challenge and created a replicable best practices educational model that consists of (1) a studentdriven grassroots platform of hunger awareness, advocacy, and fundraising/action, and (2) a multidisciplinary academic agenda that addresses long-term sustainable solutions through teaching, research, and outreach. Today nearly 300 colleges and universities worldwide are united under the UFWH banner, implementing one or more parts of the Auburn hunger model.

by Lieutenant Governor Kay Ivey, to move Alabama into the top 25 percent of food-secure states by 2020. Working with Alabama state government, as well as nonprofits, federal agencies, and corporations, the institute is taking strategic action against child hunger and malnutrition, which plagues almost one third of Alabama’s children. The HSI is committed to developing best practices from its End Child Hunger in Alabama initiative and sharing these lessons with other states nationwide.

GALS—Global Agriculture Linkage System The Hunger Solutions Institute has established a coalition of partners to connect rural women with vitally needed information via mobile technology. HSI is working with four groups: • a commercial technology company providing pro bono cell phones, as well as a mobile platform; • an NGO that specializes in training women on economic and social empowerment in Africa;

End Child Hunger in Alabama

• the End Child Hunger in Alabama coalition; and

As its first outreach initiative, the HSI has convened a statewide multi-sector partnership, chaired

• scientists in the Universities Fighting World Hunger network of nearly 300 institutions.

149

GALS will be activated via two pilot projects.

In Liberia, smallholder women farmers will have access to important agricultural information to maximize food security. In rural Alabama, pregnant women and mothers will receive information and consultation during the first 1,000 days of their babies’ lives—from conception until 24 months—the most critical stage for brain development. Knowledge about nutrition and health from the land-grant system will be conveyed to those who often have no access to prenatal care.

Hunger Solutions Institute Fellows 150

As an integral part of the higher education community, the HSI is investing in young leaders locally and globally who have the commitment, knowledge, and skills to contribute to ending hunger in their lifetime through the HSI fellowship program. The major goals are as follow: • to assemble the brightest young professionals from multi-disciplinary backgrounds to nurture innovations, methodologies, or areas of research that can address food insecurity and malnutrition; • to add to the global body of knowledge by identifying scalable best practices that lead to sustainable hunger solutions;

• to contribute to the HSI knowledge portal that makes information easily accessible to policymakers and other stakeholders; and • to prepare the HSI fellows to be leaders in the fight against hunger and mentors to the next generation of hunger activists.

In September 2013 Auburn welcomed its first cohort of four HSI Fellows—two from Auburn University and two from the University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada), an active Universities Fighting World Hunger campus that had hosted the 2011 UFWH Summit. In the inaugural year, the fellows are working on individual projects, which include marketing and distribution of an inexpensive, low-tech Lucky Iron Fish (www. luckyironfish.com) to address iron deficiency in Cambodia; an innovative initiative to culture animal protein; a new sustainable business model for NGOs; and a research project to streamline lessons learned for humanitarian workers responding to global emergencies.

Two of the fellows are spending part of their year with two of our founding host partners— the World Food Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization at their respective headquarters in Rome, Italy. Additionally, the cohort is participating in shared experiences such

as a high-level program at the United Nations in New York City taking place concurrently with the College of Human Sciences International Quality of Life Awards; a humanitarian field visit to an African refugee camp; and a final capstone assessment session back at Auburn.

Solving Hunger in the 21st Century The world has changed tremendously since the year 2000, when leaders from 191 nations established eight highly aspirational Millennium Development Goals to help the world’s most vulnerable people escape the multi-generational traps of poverty and hunger, want and oppression.

With less than two years before the 2015 deadline, the international community is focusing on

what comes next. Although we have made great strides in many parts of the world toward ending hunger, the State of Food Security report warned that there are significant challenges that must be addressed with a comprehensive global focus and investment by all sectors in order to achieve longterm food security.

Certainly, continuing to improve agricultural yield is critical to staying ahead of the increasing demand for food as the global population reaches nine billion by mid-century. Moreover, we must continue to improve food systems, reduce postharvest losses, educate girls and provide women with greater control over resources and income, place greater emphasis on good nutrition in the first 1,000 days of life, and target research and technology that can be applied to those working on the frontlines of hunger.

The question is not only how to continue progress in the areas outlined in the original MDGs but also how to adapt these developmental objectives to the 21st century. This includes helping nations build resiliency to the natural disasters that have struck with increasing frequencyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;from earthquakes in Haiti to droughts in the Horn of Africa to floods in Pakistan. Further, the international community must change its development paradigm from a donorâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;recipient

relationship (i.e., food aid) to country-led strategies in which nations, communities, and individuals are assisted on a sustainable path of economic and food security self-sufficiency.

Most important, getting ahead of the hunger curve and implementing permanent hunger solutions can occur only when we take advantage of the knowledge and experience from all disciplines and sectors. This is the essence of the Auburn hunger model that engages every academic discipline, from engineers to agronomists and

nutritionists to anthropologists, and every sector, including national governments, international organizations, NGOs, the private sector, foundations, and especially academia, to solve this profoundly complex problem. Leveraging the strength of the UFWH network, the HSI makes a place for higher education to be at the table with other partners to ensure that this will be the last generation to experience the anguish and despair of debilitating hunger.

151

We Canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t BBQ Our Way Out of This One 152

By Mark D. Smith and Stephen S. Ditchkoff

Auburn University Scientists Take the Lead in Managing a Destructive Plague of Wild Pigs

W

ild pigs, frequently referred to as feral swine or feral hogs, have been in North American for a long time—since the late 1500s, in fact, when the first wild pigs were introduced by Europeans. Since that time, small isolated populations have persisted throughout the Southeast, whether from accidental escapes from swine production operations or remnants from the bygone days of free-ranging domestic swine. In the last 20 or so years, these wild pigs have steadily increased their range and numbers in Alabama and throughout the United States, where they are now found in 47 states.

The live trapping, transporting, and then releasing of wild pigs to new areas for hunting purposes, an activity that is now illegal in all but a couple of states, has been the primary cause for this recent, dramatic spread. Once these pigs find a new home, their high rate of reproduction, combined with their adaptability, allows them to gain a foothold in their new environment. Unfortunately, the

damage wild pigs cause far outweighs their value as a recreational hunting species, something those unscrupulous people responsible for spreading wild pigs fail to understand. This is of grave concern to wildlife biologists and should also be of great concern to landowners, agricultural producers, forest owners, hunters, and livestock growers.

What’s the Big Deal?

When it comes to wild pigs, Alabama landowners can be divided into two groups—those who have pigs and those who are about to have them.

This is a problem because wild pigs are one of the most destructive animals in Alabama, causing significant damage to the state’s agricultural economy, wreaking havoc on corn, cotton, peanut, and soybean fields.

By the most conservative estimates, wild pigs cause more than $1.5 billion annually in crop damage throughout the United States and more than $55 million a year in land and crop damage in Ala-

bama. Wild pigs also compete with native wildlife, such as deer and turkeys, for limited food sources.

They also prey on bird nests, reptiles and amphibians, and other important plants and animals.

But that’s not all. Wild pigs are capable of carrying numerous diseases and parasites that may affect livestock and humans and may also serve as agents for bioterrorism. Swine brucellosis, pseudo-rabies, 153 trichinosis, tuberculosis, vesicular stomatis, and classical swine fever are of significant concern.

In fact, a simulation modeling of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease, an animal disease that is not present in the United States, would cause an estimated U.S. farm loss ranging between $13.6 billion and $20.8 billion, mainly because the loss of exports and a consumer shift to poultry products.

Aside from livestock industry losses, an outbreak would likely have devastating effects on recreationally important species such as white-tailed deer.

And once introduced to wildlife, foot and mouth disease would be nearly impossible to reign back in.

Auburn’s Eye on the Ball

154

In the middle of all the national concern over wild pigs, Auburn University has been the leader in providing the science behind much of today’s— and tomorrow’s—management of wild pigs. It’s critical that landowners and natural resource professionals receive sound, science-based information and technical guidance on wild pig ecology, management, and control methods.

Working with other faculty and staff in the Auburn University School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences and personnel from agencies such as the USDA Wildlife Services and Alabama’s Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, we have been spearheading efforts to provide Alabamians, and the nation, with the science-based information and skills they need to deal with this threat.

Our research team has studied several aspects of wild pigs, from basic ecology and biology all the way to best management practices for use in the field to control damage, and our team of Extension experts takes that science to the people in formats such a technical publications, “how to” videos, and seminars throughout the state. Our efforts have gained national and international attention. For example, we just completed a research project with the government of Morocco on the best tech-

niques and strategies for controlling wild boar in arid environments.

The School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences has partnered with the College of Veterinary Medicine to develop oral contraceptives specific to wild pigs using phage display technology patented by the Vet School. Preliminary research and development look very promising, suggesting that this new technology will be a crucial tool for managing wild pig populations in the future.

We stand at a crossroads. On one side are the rights of landowners to maintain or hunt wild pigs on their land. And there are a multitude of sports enthusiasts who enjoy hunting wild pigs. On the other side is the economic and environmental havoc that this invasive species wreaks. Unfortunately, the incredible economic and environmental damages caused by wild pigs outweigh the benefits they bring through outdoor recreation. Auburn University stands as a leader in this field and will continue to strive toward solutions to this problem.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

155

I

n the last two decades, wild pigs have increased their range and numbers in Alabama and throughout the United States. They are now found in 47 states.

Air Pollution

By Jacqueline Kochak

156

Effects on Growth and Nutritional Value of Forages

T

he nutritional value of certain grasses grazed by livestock and wild animals is decreasing due to air pollution, say two Auburn researchers.

Animal scientist Russell Muntifering and forest biologist Art Chappelka have spent years researching the way air pollution affects both the growth and nutritional value of grass, hay, and other forage.

Beef and dairy cattle graze on these plants, and these ruminants are extremely important to the agricultural economy.

Smog is usually associated with large cities, but wind can blow one component of smog—groundlevel ozone—over long distances to rural areas.

Chronic exposure to elevated ozone levels over a growing season can impair plant growth and productivity, which is cause for concern since crops in some of the world’s most productive farming regions—like California’s famed Central Valley— are now exposed to harmful ozone levels, with clear economic consequences. Muntifering and Chappelka, however, are more concerned about

the indirect effects on the animals that graze on ozone-impacted plants.

“It is safe to say that, in the Northern Hemisphere where the growing season is from March to October, ozone-sensitive species with which we have experimented show a reduction in yield of about 5 to 10 percent, and the nutritive value also is decreased by 5 to 10 percent,” Muntifering says.

He says a 10 percent reduction in yield and nutritive value might not sound like a lot, but there are potentially unsuspected physiological ramifications for the animals grazing on impacted forage. Until recently, economic assessment models included only the effects on yield depression, but Muntifering’s and Chappelka’s research has changed that. Their findings have been used by the federal government in determining the environmental impact of expanded coal and oil industries on the alfalfa growing in the western states. Canada and Europe also are considering incorporating the data into their assessments.

Ozone is the most significant “phytotoxic” (poisonous to plants) air pollutant in the world, and climate models predict that ozone concentrations will continue to increase globally between 0.3 percent and 2.0 percent per year for the next fifty years. Economic losses caused by decreased yield of agricultural crops in the United States alone are conservatively estimated to be some 157 $3 to $5 billion annually.

Muntifering and Chappelka began to collaborate in 1998, when Muntifering returned to the faculty after eight years as associate director of the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. One of his duties was managing files on research projects of faculty associated with the experiment stations, and Chappelka’s research caught his eye.

“Dr. Chappelka was looking at a certain category of chemical compounds produced in response to environmental stressors,” Muntifering says. “As a nutritionist who specializes in beef cattle, there are nutritional implications that got me thinking.

158

I wondered aloud and asked him, is there an herbivory response? Say in cattle, sheep, and deer?”

Herbivory is simply the “eating of plants,” and the two scientists agreed the topic seemed like a fertile area for research. It was already established that exposure to air pollutants can make a plant’s cell walls more “lignified,” or rigid and woody.

They thought tougher cell composition could have ramifications for the ruminants that graze grasses, such as cattle, sheep, buffalo, and goats.

The digestive systems of ruminants are adapted to handle fibrous herbaceous material. Their stomachs have four compartments, with the first two separating food into liquids and solids. Then the solids are regurgitated and chewed to decrease the size of fiber particles—as in “chewing the cud”—before the food is swallowed again and passed into the stomach’s other chambers.

“Non-ruminants like rabbits, horses, and humans would compensate for decreased nutrition by eating more,” Muntifering says. “But ruminants are unable to eat more as fibrosity and lignification of forage are increased.”

Increased fiber content and lignification in the plants that ruminants eat actually lowers an animal’s intake, because the rumen—the main compartment in the four-chambered stomach, where microbial action starts breaking down the plant mass—physically fills up. Muntifering and Chappelka, along with Dr. Stephen Ditchkoff (an Auburn wildlife biologist), have collected flora from the rumens of cows and deer to determine the effect of ozone exposure on the various microorganisms that digest grasses and forage material.

“You can inoculate vegetation with bacterial cultures and see how extensively the microorganisms degrade the forage,” Muntifering says. “In our experience, when you incubate or inoculate forages that

are more fibrous and lignified, the fiber-degrading microorganisms are less effective.”

Muntifering’s and Chappelka’s research program now is regarded universally as the international center of excellence on the effects of air pollution on forage quality for agriculturally important ruminant livestock and wildlife. They collaborate extensively with U.S., Canadian, and European centers of excellence on a variety of vegetation types, and have experimented with both annual and perennial plants using diverse experimental systems in different kinds of environments.

Europeans are paying close attention to their research. The reason is economic; European foods are held to strict standards, and pollution from Italy’s teeming Po Valley is wreaking havoc on vegetation in the Swiss Alps, where “first cheese” is produced from the early lactation of cattle.

Similarly, the pigs that produce Italy’s famed porchetta dine on acorns. And in Spain olive trees could be affected.

“If you start messing with the chemistry of the foliage in the forage in the Swiss Alps, or of the oak trees that produce acorns, or of the olive trees in Spain, the Europeans are going to take action,” Muntifering says.

In their atmospheric deposition field site in Auburn, the two researchers grow forage in 24

open-top aluminum outdoor chambers where they manipulate the environment by blowing in various levels of ozone. Then they harvest the forage and conduct laboratory assessments of the plants’ nutritive quality. From that information, they are able predict the impact on the nutritional economy of an animal.

Most recently, the two researchers fed forage affected by ozone to live animals (domesticated white rabbits), measuring nutrient utilization by collecting the animals’ feces and urine and doing a nutritive balance study. For now, rabbits have validated their models, showing that intake and digestive utilization of nutrients were significantly decreased when forage was exposed to air pollution. Although rabbits have a different kind of digestion system (without the four-chambered stomach), they also are strictly herbivorous.

Ultimately, Muntifering and Chappelka hope to conduct controlled-environment experiments with large ruminant animals such as sheep and cattle in

open-top chambers and free-air systems. They will incorporate data from these into landscape-level process models that are currently being developed at Auburn University and elsewhere.

Muntifering’s and Chappelka’s research has led to some potentially alarming conclusions. Recent reports have claimed that elevated levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will protect plants under stress from ozone. Their preliminary findings, however, indicate that future increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations cannot be expected to ameliorate the negative impact of elevated ozone on forage productivity and nutritional quality, given scenarios projected for the Northern Hemisphere—including the U.S.—through at least the first half of the current century.

These findings represent a significant departure from conventional wisdom about the effects of elevated carbon dioxide on plants, illustrating the need for “real world” experiments in climatechange research. In other words, research is needed

that exposes plants to mixtures of common air pollutants that approximate actual levels the plants would be exposed to in their natural environments.

At present, most research utilizes individual pollutants in controlled-environment experiments like those conducted by Muntifering and Chappelka.

The two scientists along with other collaborators are still seeking to understand why exposure 159 to ozone makes plant cells more rigid and woody, and thus more difficult to digest and less nutritious for herbivores. They believe the plants’ metabolism changes, particularly the compounds called “phenolics,” which plants produce to protect themselves against stressors. They believe changes in the complexity and molecular weight of these compounds wreak havoc with the digestion process.

“Ozone is just one component of climate change, so we would like to add other pollutants,” Muntifering says. “Even though we’ve been working on this for almost 15 years, we’re really just starting to get into the good stuff.”

i

s

s

u

e

s

Water Management a Top Priority for Alabama Poultry Processing

by Joe Hess and Sarge Bilgili

160

Alabama’s poultry industry is a major force in the state’s economy, providing 15 percent of Alabama’s gross domestic product (GDP) and tens of thousands of jobs. This economic engine for our state fosters family farms and accounts for 65 percent of agricultural income. Alabama—a state of five million people—processes 20 million broilers per week, exporting chicken to many other regions of the United States as well as internationally. But poultry production is a water-intensive system, and the industry has looked extensively at methods to reduce water consumption, particularly in poultry processing.

Water conservation efforts in broiler processing have primarily centered around reducing the amount of water used per bird and ensuring the cleanliness of water returning to the environment following wastewater treatment. Since food safety

concerns have over time increased the use of water, ensuring the optimum quality of water leaving the processing plant has drawn more attention over the last decade or so. Water use by a poultry processing plant may rival that of a small town, and most processing plants have municipal-grade wastewater treatment facilities on site. Agricultural enterprises of this size have a social and regulatory obligation to protect the environment, and wastewater handling is a high priority for each poultry operation in Alabama.

One interesting model for wastewater handling has been installed by Keystone Foods in Baker Hill, Alabama. In addition to using a standard wastewater treatment system, the company has chosen to move wastewater through constructed wetlands to naturally remove any remaining biological waste products.

The elaborately constructed wetlands system is an environmentally friendly method to assist mechanical systems in managing wastewater produced through agricultural product processing. Keystone Foodsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; processing division maintains the wetlands system to provide a final cleansing of the 1.4 to 2 million gallons of water used to process 200,000 broilers five days a week.

Wastewater from Keystoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary and further processing plants is first routed through a standard

mechanical and biological wastewater treatment facility. During this initial stage, standard pretreatment (rotary drum and dissolved air flotation) and secondary treatments (clarifiers and a holding pond) are completed prior to the wastewater entering the constructed wetlands (tertiary treatment and disposal). Dissolved air flotation removes suspended matter by dissolving air in the wastewater under pressure and then releasing the air at atmospheric pressure in a flotation tank or basin. The released air forms tiny bubbles that adhere to the suspended matter, which floats to the surface of the water where it is removed by a skimming device.

Dissolved air flotation combined with clarifiers removes a large portion of the biological oxygen demand and suspended solids, and ammonia levels are significantly reduced at this point. Although water quality after these initial steps is more than satisfactory for release into the local water table, Keystone Foods routes its water through the managed wetlands to remove any remaining nutrients.

A free-water surface constructed wetlands system seeks to reproduce the natural biological processes that occur in a wild wetlands area like a marsh or a swamp. In the system designed

by Mother Nature, water flows slowly through the wetland. As the water flows, particles settle, pathogens are destroyed, and organisms and plants

take up and utilize nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous.

The Keystone Foods-constructed wetlands system contains 16 cells on a 55-acre site adjacent to the processing facilities. After secondary processing, water flows into two sets of six cells, which are planted in cattails. An additional four cells, planted in wild rice, bulrush, cattails, and giant reeds, provide final cleansing. After flowing through the banks of cells, the water passes through microscreens, then rapid infiltration beds, followed by a sand infiltration bed before being allowed to disperse into the ground. Final effluent benchmarks include a biological oxygen demand of 30, a total suspended solids of 50, and a summer NH3 (ammonia) of 2.6 (winter NH3 is 4.6).

This award-winning, ecologically friendly waste management system has been in operation for more than a decade. Alabama poultry companies understand why water management, water conservation, and water quality are important for the wellbeing of our state. Good water management makes both civic and fiscal sense for large poultry operations, and the Keystone Foods operation has created a model system for protecting the environment that extends beyond expected wastewater treatment standards.

161

162

Peanuts

By Charles Chen, Phat Dang, and Marshall Lamb

Genetic Improvement of Drought Tolerance for Productivity and Food Safety

P

eanuts are one of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most important legumes. They are grown primarily in Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and rank as the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 13th most important food crop and fourth most valuable oilseed crop. China (13.4 million tons), India (7.7 million tons), and the United States (1.9 million tons) are the largest producers in the world. In addition to being a rich source of oil (44-50 percent), protein (20-50 percent), and carbohydrates (10-20 percent), peanut seeds contain vitamin E, niacin, falacin, folate, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, zinc, iron, riboflavin, thiamine, and potassium.

About 90 percent of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s peanuts are cultivated in tropical and semi-arid tropical regions, and approximately 65 percent of United States-grown peanuts are cultivated in dry land, rain-fed conditions, where peanuts are frequently subjected to drought stresses for different duration and intensities. Production losses in agriculture during the drought and heat wave of 2011 in the

U.S. were estimated at $10 billion, and one of the affected crops was peanuts. Drought is also known to predispose peanuts to aflatoxin contamination, making them unsafe for human consumption. In short, drought during growing season has resulted in decreased yield, poor-quality peanuts, and aflatoxin contamination. Increased worldwide demand for water due to rapid population growth and irrigation practices has resulted in declines in aquifers, limiting availability of water for irrigation.

To meet future food-supply demands, crop production will have to increase, but it must do so under the constraints of less water and, most likely, less farm land.

A research team from Auburn University and the USDA-ARS National Peanut Research Laboratory (NPRL) in Dawson, Georgia, is working to help peanut farmers maintain and improve their production in a changing environment.

Since peanuts lack desirable genetic variation in drought tolerance, several conventional as well as

molecular breeding techniques are being adopted to improve drought tolerance. Efforts to improve drought stress among peanuts have focused on biological understanding of drought tolerance, gene expression in peanuts during drought stress, molecular marker development and application of marker-assisted (MAS) plant breeding, and development of genetically engineered peanuts to endure drought stress.

Agronomical and Physiological Responses to Drought Stress A conceptual model for drought adaptation includes four major factors: pre-anthesis growth, access to water traits, water-use efficiency (WUE), and photo-protection. Pre-anthesis growth is related to rapid canopy growth to minimize evaporative loss from soil. WUE includes canopy growth, which is defined as above-ground biomass produced per unit of water extracted from the soil. Access to water traits is related to root depth

163

and intensity characteristics. Photo-protection is another mechanism that improves water-use efficiency, in which leaflet morphology such as wax/ pubescence and specific leaf area, pigments of the leaflet, and antioxidants are contributed to WUE. 164 Because WUE is a multi-component trait, it is impractical for large-scale breeding programs to select for multiple drought-tolerant characteristics in a single plant. Drought-related physiological traits such as harvest index (HI), WUE, specific leaf area (SLA), and SPAD chlorophyll meter reading (SCMR) have been intensively evaluated over the past decade as surrogates for transpiration efficiency (TE) in peanuts. SLA, measured as the ratio of leaf area to leaf dry matter, is negatively related to leaf thickness and, hence, may serve as a surrogate trait for WUE in a wide range of crops.

However, a yield-based selection approach for

improvement of drought tolerance in peanuts may be more useful than those of surrogate traits. Yield, grade, and physical responses to drought stress are essential to identifying physical, physiological, or chemical (phenotyping) drought tolerance traits in peanuts. Since 2010 we have started a research program to identify and quantify drought tolerance in peanuts with application in the areas of physiology, breeding and genetics, and genomics. For example, experiments were designed to identify the growth stage that most affects peanut productivity, to evaluate plant response patterns of agronomical traits (yield and grade) and physiological traits at different stages, and to identify drought-tolerant and susceptible genotypes to be used for further genetic study.

Unlike studying other traits, for drought study, plants have to be grown in environmentally

controlled plots where soil water content can be managed accordingly to ensure uniform drought treatment. For drought experiments, peanuts were planted in environmentally controlled rainout shelters (5.5 m X 12.2m) (Figure 1) at the National Peanut Research Laboratory, in Dawson, GA, with controls of both soil moisture and temperature.

The experiments concluded that the genotype with the best drought tolerance was “C76-16” while “AP-3” had the least drought tolerance. “C76-16” is an advanced breeding line derived from Dr. Corley Holbrook’s program at USDA-ARS, Plant Breeding and Genetics Unit, in Tifton, GA. A comparison between irrigated and non-irrigated regimes showed that stress occurring 60 days after planting (DAP) had the greatest effect on yield and total sound mature kernel (TSMK), followed by 90 then 30 DAP. These data imply that “C76-16” could

be used as a drought-tolerant parental donor and drought stress treatment at 60 DAP.

Gene Expression During Drought Stress in Peanuts In order to cope with the dynamic environmental changes, plants have evolved a complex network of perception and signal transduction. It has been established that signal transduction involves both abscisic acid (ABA) dependent and ABA independent pathways. Transcription factors have been identified as key effectors that regulate the expression of downstream genes involved in the acclimation process. The APETALA 2/ethylene-responsive element binding factor (AP2/ERF) represents a large family of plant-specific transcription factors that are divided into four major subfamilies: AP2, ERF, RAV (related to ABI3/VP1), and DREB (dehydration-responsive element binding protein) and are involved in various stresses such as low or high temperature and water stress.

Peanut production is adversely affected by drought depending on the duration or severity.

Plant selection for superior drought tolerance has been difficult due to extreme variability based on year and location. This is compounded by the fact that low genetic polymorphisms were observed in cultivated peanuts, which requires the develop-

ment of a large number of molecular markers as well as the identification of genes that are regulated under drought stress. Recent advances in the development of genomics resources for variety development are promising; however, selecting plants with higher tolerance continues to be difficult due to the multigenic nature of drought response and strong environmental interaction. Development of geneexpression profiling of tolerant and susceptible peanut genotypes may provide a better approach for plant selection.

In 2012, we conducted research to identify transcription factors that can respond early to drought stress and return to normal levels upon water availability. We compared a droughtsusceptible genoptype and a tolerant genotype (C76-16) under a short-term drought treatment and recovery (21 days). Twelve putative transcription factors were identified, and real-time PCR analysis was performed, resulting in the identification of three unique transcripts in which ahERF1 was highly induced in the recovery stage; ahERF7 and ahERF8 were also highly induced by drought and returned to nominal levels after recovery. These sequences contain DNA binding domains that are present in the APETALA2/ Ethelene Responsive Factors (AP2/ERF) family of transcription factors, which have been shown to be

induced by stress. Induction levels and patterns of gene expression of ahERF1, ahERF7, and ahERF8 may be used to select plants that may have higher drought tolerance.

Breeding Toward Drought Tolerance Crop improvement for production, desirable traits, and resistance to biotic stress and abiotic stress are essential objectives of a plant-breeding program. Due to limitations of the gene pool or the restricted range of organisms between which genes can be transferred, new bio-techniques in addition to conventional methods are needed to develop peanut cultivars with resistance to drought and pre-harvest aflatoxin contamination.

165 Recent ongoing research of the peanut genomics project offers tools to assist in breeding. The identification of genomic regions associated with drought tolerance would enable breeders to develop improved cultivars with increased drought tolerance using marker-assisted selection. About 10,000 SSR markers have been identified from the peanut genome, providing promising genetic and genomic tools in peanut breeding. In addition to SSR markers, SNP markers have also been developed. Genetic linkage maps with SSR markers have been constructed for diploid AA genome, BB genome, tetraploid AABB genome of cultivated

peanuts, and even a peanut SNP marker geneticlinkage map is available. To identify the genomic regions suitable for marker-assisted breeding strategies, it is important to establish accurate phenotyping methods, develop highly saturated molecular marker-based genetic linkage maps, and then identify QTLs (quantitative trait loci) associated with traits of interest. A research project funded by the American Peanut Foundation and being carried out by a graduate student, Joshua Carter, under supervision of Dr. Charles Chen, aims to identify QTLs associated with drought tolerance in

166

peanuts. This could speed up the breeding process for developing drought-tolerant peanuts.

Classical breeding for drought tolerance in peanuts is challenging because of variability in time, intensity, and duration of stress. The use of genetic engineering technology to over-express drought-tolerant genes in peanuts is an attractive prospective way to improve tolerance. This requires the identifying genes underlying stress tolerance in peanut plants and introducing these genes into peanut crops. Our previous research on the identification of QTL and transcription factors will pave

the way to discover the genes that control drought tolerance. A peanut regeneration system and transformation technology in peanuts have been recently established in NPRL, and the transgenic peanuts carrying genes with resistance to leaf spot disease have been successfully developed and are under evaluation. Several stress-induced genes that have been introduced in other plants by genetic engineering have resulted in increased drought tolerance. Therefore, genetically engineered peanuts will endure drought stress.

Continuing research is needed to assure that U.S. peanuts maintain their competitive advantage.

Peanuts are the 12th most valuable cash crop in the U.S., with an annual farm value of $1 billion and contributing more than $4 billion to the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy each year. Unlike other countries, peanuts produced in the U.S. are used primarily for food, commanding a premium price about 25 percent higher than other countries due to their high quality. These quality aspects include low aflatoxin levels, good flavor, and long shelf-life due to high oleic acid content. In cooperation with NPRL, the peanut breeding program at Auburn University is in a special position to help meet future demands for food and to explore all possibilities for achieving higher crop yield and quality among U.S. peanut farmers.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

167

P

eanuts are the 12th most valuable cash crop in the U.S., with an annual farm value of $1 billion and contributing more than $4 billion to the coun­tryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy each year.

168

Beekeeping in Kenya

By William Deutsch and Njogu Kahare

Empowering People to Understand, Value, and Protect Their Resources

H

oney has been an important part of the human diet for millennia, and gathering wild honey predates agriculture in many parts of the world. In Kenya, traditional cultures placed a high value on honey and related products of the beehive. A new project of Global Water Watch (GWW) at Auburn University and the Green Belt Movement in Kenya is finding innovative ways to link honey production with improved nutrition, higher incomes, community development, and river protection.

Project Background The Global Water Watch program is a worldwide network of community-based water monitoring groups that has been coordinated by the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences

William Deutsch (far left) and Njogu Kahare (far right) with Kenyan beekeepers.

(formerly the Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures) for nearly 20 years. In 2013, GWW found a new home in the Auburn University Water Resources Center but maintains strong ties with Fisheries and is expanding its partnership with the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES).

Building from a model of a community-based, science-based approach to aquatic resource management that began with the Alabama Water Watch program in 1992, GWW has worked in almost a dozen countries with citizen groups that often include indigenous peoples. The Quichua of Ecuador, Quechua and Aymara of Peru, Akha of Thailand, and Tala-Andig of the Philippines are some of the indigenous groups that have participated in GWW workshops and monitoring activities, along with people of various ethnicities from Mexico, Brazil, China, Argentina, and Nicaragua.

Cross-cultural perspectives on water have greatly enhanced GWWâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s understanding of how people relate to and value their aquatic resources.

Though many GWW volunteer water monitors have relatively little science background or formal schooling, they have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to master simple but accurate water-testing procedures to amass an important record of the condition and trends of their bodies of water. This information has been used to educate students and the general public, guide stream restoration 169 projects, and improve water policy. The story of GWW and Alabama Water Watch was presented as a chapter in Auburn Speaks: On Water (2013).

In 2012, the Green Belt Movement (GBM) in Kenya contacted GWW through the Sub-Saharan Africa Program Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. GBM is a nongovernmental organization founded by Wangari Maathai, a woman who grew up in the Central Highlands of Kenya near snow-capped Mt. Kenya. She was a Kikuyu, the most populous tribe of the more than 40 tribes in Kenya, making up nearly one-quarter of the current population. Maathai was one of the first

170

Kenyan students to receive a scholarship to study in the United States as part of a precursor program to the Peace Corps, originated by then-Senator John F. Kennedy in 1959.

Wangari Maathai returned to Kenya in the early 1960s with a degree in biology and academic aspirations but soon left the university to commit her life to helping community groups (especially women and girls) restore her largely deforested and environmentally degraded homeland.

Decades of planting trees (more than 50 million and counting)—by Green Belt Movement groups—have resulted in restored forests and recovering ecosystems.

GBM’s work with Maathai’s leadership also greatly raised public awareness about the environment, empowered thousands of Kenyans to take action, and changed the nation. Illegal logging was exposed, and transparency and public participation in natural resource management were enhanced. For this amazing accomplishment, Wangari Maathai was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. In spite of her untimely death in 2011, GBM continues its good work with an active staff and new leadership, including GBM’s international programs director and Wangari’s daughter, Wanjira Mathai.

Forest restoration in Kenya has had the added benefit of renewing the flow of springs and streams,

and the general impression of improved water quality and quantity. GBM was advised by one of its many funding agencies, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), to do a more systematic and quantified assessment of the aquatic resource, and this led to the first contact with GWW at Auburn. A community-based water monitoring approach that built on GBM’s decades of mobilizing local people to plant trees seemed to be the most practical and effective way for collecting watershed data.

Following countless emails, videoconferences, and a trip to the Sub-Saharan Africa Program Office of EPA in Washington, D.C., by AU representatives of GWW and the Water Resources Center, a plan for collaboration unfolded for establishing a water-monitoring program in Kenya. The first two trips to Kenya by the GWW director in November 2012 and March 2013 were to meet partners, orient GBM staff, and elaborate on a plan for starting a water-monitoring program.

International travel expenses for these initial visits were funded by the Jack and Mary Tankersley Endowment to the AU School of Fisheries.

This endowment was established by the late AU School of Engineering alumnus Jack Tankersley for community development projects to benefit underserved people worldwide. Because of a trip

to Africa that deeply impressed Tankersley decades before, his heart and special interests were invested in helping the poor of Africa.

The Beekeeping Component The tree planting of GBM and watershed monitoring and stewardship of GWW seemed like a natural fit, but a beekeeping component added an important dimension to the project. There are several reasons why beekeeping could make the community-based water-monitoring program more sustainable.

Cultural and nutritional value of honey and hive products

As previously mentioned, honey and other beehive products have deep roots in Kikuyu culture. A traditional honey-water drink was made by melting crushed honeycomb in warm water and sieving it to remove wax, bee parts, and other solids. Honey was traditionally a part of the dowry or “bride price” for marriage, and a man needed to have at least 20 liters of choice honey to present to a prospective fatherin-law when asking for his daughter’s hand.

Historically, Kikuyu household compounds typically had two huts—one for the man and a larger hut for the woman, children, livestock, pantry, and storage. On important occasions for making family

decisions, the wife would enter her husband’s hut in the evening, and conversations would begin after he presented her with a food called “rukuri,” choice cuts of roasted meat dipped in some of his best honey. This token showed a man’s love and respect for his wife, and smoothed the way for marital harmony and productive interactions.

Honey was only part of the hive products that added vital nutrients to Kikuyu diets. Pollen, nectar, and brood (larval bees in the comb) provided vitamins, proteins, sugars, and micronutrients, and wax was used as a sealant. Mixtures of these substances were carefully prepared to suit particular tribal rituals and meals, including a choice honey beer and a stronger alcoholic drink that combined honey, brood, and pollen. Children were provided select honey that did not contain crushed bee parts, which might include still-potent stingers.

Though beekeeping is somewhat of a lost art, the importance and desirability of honey continues among many Kikuyu today and the practice is now slowly reviving in Kenya.

Boosting local economies

Because of their traditional value and the important attributes that modern science has discovered, locally produced honey and hive products have a high market value in Kenya. Honey originally was

gathered from wild hives in trees, but beekeeping steadily evolved into more managed systems.

First, simple hollow-log hives were made to have greater control over hive number and location, and some farmers had more than 100 log hives placed in forests that fully supported their livelihood.

In the 1970s, the “top-bar hive” was introduced to Kenya. This type of hive is wide and short, constructed from lumber with hanging frames on which bees build their honeycomb. Wild bees are attracted to the hive by its dimensions, placement in trees, and by “seeding” it with beeswax. Use of the top-bar hive remains the most popular way to do beekeeping in the country. The Langstroth hive, the most common hive used in the United States, 171 has been introduced but is not yet widely adopted in Kenya because of accessibility, expense, and management issues.

With the growth of cities and the expansion of supermarkets, the demand for honey has created opportunities for mass production and modern marketing. The Kenyan Ministry of Livestock is promoting beekeeping using bar hives, and development organizations such as USAID have provided grants to beekeepers to expand their operations. However, many more producers are needed to fully meet the domestic demands for honey, let alone those of international markets.

172

A steady flow of high-quality honey can net a Kenyan farmer a much greater income than most other agricultural crops that the farmer can produce. Limiting factors to this potential source of livelihood include a lack of beekeeping cooperatives, business plans, and quality-assurance plans.

Among the necessary tests of honey quality for commercial marketing, (including smell, moisture content, and particle concentration) assurance that the product is free from E. coli (the fecal coliform bacterium, Escherichia coli) is also critical. Plans are underway through the GWW—GBM watershed

stewardship project to adapt simple E. coli water tests for testing honey.

An additional suspected threat to honey production is the changing climate in the central highlands of Kenya. Historically known as a region of moderate temperatures, continuous flowering of various plants, and predictable rainy and dry seasons, the central highlands now see temperature extremes and changing precipitation patterns that have become common in recent years. High temperatures have been known to melt honeycomb from top-bar hives, and changes to hive design

and management may soon be necessary to ensure steady production.

Beekeeping builds community solidarity and economic stability that allows people to consider other activities, including community service and volunteerism. As learned in previous GWW projects, livelihood activities integrated with watershed stewardship programs “create space” for water monitoring. People need to feel relatively secure economically before they perceive having the time to learn new things and apply their skills for the good of the community. Raised incomes from beekeeping allow people to pay for their children’s school fees and otherwise increase the family’s quality of life. It also allows them to think broadly about environmental protection and restoration, and to consider getting personally involved with watershed stewardship.

Restoring the environment and protecting water resources

Tree-planting projects frequently meet resistance from local people because land that could be grazed or farmed is converted to forest. Limited-resource farmers often see this as their loss, especially when they are relocated by government policy, and GBM tree projects have sometimes been sabotaged as a result. One

solution is to provide new economic incentives for enabling restoration of forests and other natural vegetation. Placement of beehives along riverbanks is one of those incentives.

The streamside (riparian) zone is an ideal spot for beekeeping because it is often close enough to households for convenient tending of hives, yet far enough away from concentrated agricultural production that exposes the bees to farm pesticides. It also keeps active, sometimes aggressive, bees away from people. Placement of hives in the deep forest is less desirable because of long distances from homes and lack of security from theft or destruction by wild animals.

The land along streams frequently floods and is, therefore, less suitable for permanent structures and many activities. But hives placed in streamside trees are not inundated and provide good income from the floodplain. This creates an alternative to dry-season farming, which destroys the stream buffer zone and results in soil erosion and water pollution.

Keeping the riparian zone in natural vegetation and trees provides an area of high floral diversity where one or more plant species is flowering yearround to provide a continuous supply of nectar and pollen for bees. These eco-friendly zones filter polluted runoff before it enters streams. Stream-

side vegetation traps sediments, excess nutrients, and pathogens; provides important habitats for wildlife; and helps maintain both water quality and quantity. Bees do their part by pollinating plants of this area and serving as “watchdogs” for potentially destructive livestock or people.

Next Steps Following the initial meetings and two trips to Kenya from Auburn University, the EPA funded a one-year pilot project of GWW and GBM, in a cooperative agreement with the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, a nongovernmental organization from Washington, D.C. The GWW—GBM project has initiated water monitoring and environmental education activities in the Upper Tana River Watershed that originates between Mt. Kenya and the Aberdare Range of mountains. Scores of community members from four areas of the watershed have begun to attend workshops to learn how to test water, and they are now establishing 100 monitoring sites on several streams and drinking water supplies. Many of these volunteers have previously participated in GBM activities such as tree planting, beekeeping, and other forms of community development.

The Tana River is one of the largest in the country and provides much of the water for the

capital city, Nairobi. This river is a priority of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), which manages the first Water Fund in Africa. The goal of the Water Fund is to ensure a steady supply of clean water for Kenyans by protecting and restoring watersheds and headwater tributaries. This is carried out by securing necessary funding from large corporations and governmental entities as well as financing projects that benefit communities and water resources.

Representatives of TNC have been kept informed about the GWW—GBM project and have expressed interest in collaboration and support.

Soon after launching field activities of the GWW–GBM watershed project in October 2013, it became clear that local people enthusiastically 173 embraced the concept of “citizen science” and water monitoring, and have new attitudes and skills regarding their health and that of the environment and their bees. The goal of many Kenyan beekeepers is to expand their market and income, and this would be greatly enhanced by achieving a government-certified label that ensures honey purity, organic production, and sustainable practices that protect and improve the environment and communities. The GWW— GBM project is helping to make that goal a reality, with support from the Tankersley Fund and other Auburn University resources.

The Old Federal Road

by Kathryn Braund

174

Historic Road Rich with Stories of Evolving Food Traditions

I

n the spring of 1830, Mrs. Anne Royall, one of early America’s best-selling travel writers, set out from Augusta, Georgia, on the “great mail route, from Washington City to New Orleans.”

At Columbus, Georgia, before she crossed the Chattahoochee River for her trek across Creek Indian territory, Mrs. Royall was told she would have “a poor chance for dinner.” She secured a peach pie from her Columbus host, and at Fort Mitchell, an army base that was her first stop on the west side of the river, she selected “a considerable ration of dried venison and bread” (likely cornbread) at a store run by the Indian agent’s brother. As a result, she and her fellow passengers “fared pretty well” as their stage chugged into the wilderness of the Creek Nation (Royall 2:147 1831). Much to her surprise, when

Lucas Tavern in Waugh, Alabama, located on the old Federal Road, Courtesy of the Alabama Department of Archives and History.

the stagecoach stopped to change horses at “the only house where dinner was likely to be had,” she was surprised to find that “lo!—dinner was set” (Royall 2:148 1831).

Mrs. Royall’s apprehension about what she would eat on the “Federal Road” journey was typical. Careful attention to accounts of dining adventures are not only entertaining but instructive, providing insight about traveler expectations as well as the changing foodways of the early South.

Alabama’s historic Federal Road, as Mrs. Royall noted in her book, was originally a post road designed to provide faster mail communications between the east coast and the Louisiana Purchase.

Work began in 1806, after much wrangling with the Creek Indians, whose territory was bisected by the road. At first, the road was no more than a horse path for post riders. But, in time, it was widened and expanded by numerous side routes, while the addition of bridges, causeways, and ferries assisted travelers at river and swamp crossings. The road

ran through forests and uninhabited areas, making it essential to build “stops” or “stands” to provide fresh horses for post riders and accommodation for travelers. At first, Creek owners operated these stands, but they were soon edged out as hostility toward Indians mounted in the 1820s and 1830s.

Most stands were crude log or frame buildings that offered little in the way of comfort.

175 By the 1820s, traffic increased dramatically along the road as travelers and emigrants trundled west to sightsee or settle, and several of the inns slowly established a reputation for comfort and hospitality. The thousands who traveled along the Federal Road from the end of the Creek War through Indian Removal in the late 1830s encountered a variety of foods and dining experiences that reveal the changing nature of foodways and the commercialization of hospitality in the region as well as the cultural reordering of the entire region.

One of the first stands established along the road was built around 1808 by Samuel Moniac, a

prominent and wealthy Creek Indian. His “house,” as it was called, was located near modern-day Pintlala, Alabama. About the same time, another wealthy Creek, James Cornells, also built a stand at Burnt Corn Springs on the southern section of the new road. Indians were, by treaty, given the right and responsibility for supplying travelers along the road. The primary purpose of these early stands was to accommodate post riders and supply fresh horses and fodder. It was not long before others were stopping in, including Army officers bound for Fort Stoddard on the lower Alabama River or those traveling to Mobile or New Orleans.

In no small measure, the Federal Road and its 176 travelers led directly to the Creek War, as American demands for more and more concessions and increasing traffic angered a faction of the Creek Nation. When Americans widened the postal path to accommodate military wagons in anticipation of a war with Great Britain and a fight for the Gulf Coast, violence erupted and the Creeks went to war in 1813. The Federal Road stands owned by wealthy Creeks were some of the first targets of hostile Creeks and were destroyed.

Following the Creek War, Sam Moniac filed a petition seeking compensation for his losses. His document, supported by archaeological evidence, reveals that Moniac’s stand was a very bare-bones

establishment. His “House on the Federal Road” was valued at $30, while his own dwelling located off the road was valued at $190. Unlike his own home, the tavern did not include feather beds.

Based on the low value and remains found during excavations, it seems likely that the structure was a simple log building, most likely a dogtrot cabin typical for the time and region. When fellow Creeks destroyed his stand, Moniac lost stocks of necessities like coffee, sugar, and whiskey, as well as cooking, storage, and serving utensils, including

iron pots, Dutch ovens, “large japanned sugar canisters,” demijohns, funnels, cork screws, tin kettles, plates, two dozen cups and saucers, tumblers, and tin cups (Christopher and Waselkov 2012).

Sugar and dessert sweets arrived in the Creek Country with deerskin traders like Moniac’s father, who, eager for the tastes of home, introduced cattle and chicken (milk and eggs) to their Creek wives.

The traders also carried chocolate, coffee, and sugar from South Carolina and Georgia into the Creek country, where they taught their wives to make

Household artifacts recovered from Moniac’s “house” on the Federal Road include both Creek and English glazed pottery: (a) green edge-decorated pearlware plate rim; (b) saucer rim with hand-painted brown band; (c-g) plain pearlware body sherds; (h) plain fine sand tempered body sherd, probably historic Creek Indian pottery. Image courtesy of the Gregory A. Waselkov, Center of Archaeological Studies, University of South Alabama .

“puddings, pyes, pasties, fritters, and many other articles of the like kind” (Braund 2005). Fragments of both Creek-made pottery and imported English tableware were recovered archaeologically at the site of the stand, providing evidence of the evolving cuisines and serving styles among the most prominent Creeks at the early taverns they operated on the Federal Road.

Nearly two decades after Moniac build his house, James Stuart, a Scottish lawyer, stopped at the “famous” Lucas’s Tavern. The fattest woman that he had ever seen greeted him, he later wrote.

Although, he added, it was apparent to him that she had once been “a good-looking woman.” Thirty-five year old Eliza Lucas impressed the traveler in every way, and he complimented her, noting that she managed the entire tavern operation “admirably.”

The tavern—then and now—was the best-known and most respected establishment along what modern Alabamians know as the Old Federal Road. Mrs. Lucas and her husband were not Creek Indians but former residents of the relatively new town of Montgomery who had seized a business opportunity on the Federal Road.

Lucas’s Tavern was a modest frame structure of four rooms built around a long central hallway—a dogtrot. Opened just to the west of Line Creek, which marked the boundary between Creek and

Alabama territory (and still marks the boundary between Macon and Montgomery counties), the tavern had originally opened in 1818 but was purchased by George and Eliza Lucas in 1821.

By the time James Stuart arrived, Eliza was a seasoned hostess, having greeted Alabama’s most distinguished foreign traveler, the Marquis de Lafayette, in 1825. By that time, she had “done up’” the place spectacularly, according to early Alabama historian Thomas Woodward, who knew the tavern well.

To Stuart and his fellow travelers, Mrs. Lucas served “as comfortable a meal as we found anywhere in travelling in the United States,” Stuart said. In his book, Three Years in North America, Stuart recalled his dining experience.

At dinner, she sat at the head of the table, her husband sitting at one side; and the dinner, consist­ing of chicken-pie, ham, vegetables, pudding, and pie, was so neatly put upon the table, and so well cooked—and the dessert, consisting of dried fruits, preserved strawberries and plumbs, was so excel­lent of all its kinds, and withal the guests seemed to be made so welcome to every thing that was best, that Mrs. Lucas was, in our eyes, almost as meritorious a person as the old lady at the Bridge Inn, at Ferrybridge in Yorkshire, whose good cheer no Scotsman,

traveling between London and Edinburgh, ever omitted, if it was in his power to enjoy.

In the late 18th century, Creeks had been widely praised for their food and their gracious hospitality to strangers. William Bartram, who traveled through their towns just prior to the American Revolution on an Indian trade path that was the precursor to much of the Federal Road route, wrote about this famous Creek trait in his book, Travels, declaring that: Such is their hospitality to Strangers, I know that a Creek Indian would not only receive in his house a Traveler or Sojourner of whatever Nation, Colour or Language, (without distinction of rank or any other exception of person) 177 and here treat him as a Brother or his own Child, as long as he pleases to Stay, and this without the least hope or thought of interest or reward, but serves you with the best of every thing his ability can afford; he would divide with you the last grain of corn, or piece of flesh (Waselkov and Braund 1995).

Bartram, like other visitors to the Creek nation, was regaled by feasts as well as ordinary meals during his sojourn and provided details on Creek cuisine, including the numerous ways that Creeks prepared venison and corn, their two staple foods. But he also noted the new additions

to Creek horticulture and diet, including peaches, watermelons, and other European fruits, as well as the growing number of pigs and cattle. The fruits were welcomed and spread far and wide by the Indians themselves. The historic record notes their generous gift of watermelon seeds to the Cherokee Indians in the late 18th century as a sign of peace.

On the other hand, it was deerskin traders who introduced the cattle, which were as prized for the milk, butter, and cheese they could produce as for their meat and hides. Domestic livestock was a new concept and proved troublesome due to their litter and tendency to damage unfenced Indian cornfields. Since, by and large, Creeks did not favor 178 dairy products or the pies and puddings some Creek women learned to make for their European-American husbands, cattle herd numbers grew slowly until the period after the American Revolution.

In addition to broiled or roasted game, soups and stews, and traditionally prepared corn dishes, travelers were exposed to an eclectic mix of meats and vegetables that increasingly defined “Southern” food as well “Indian” food. On the tavern table, bacon, eggs, roasted chickens, cream, and butter reflected the establishment of domesticated hogs, chickens, and dairy cattle in the region. Introduced in the 18th century by deerskin traders eager for the tastes of home, these animals had a heavy

impact on the environment of the Southeast. Cattle and pigs, like chickens—called by the Indians “dung heap fowl”—brought animal litter into the heart of Indian settlements and the yards of inns and taverns, and the Creeks abhorred the filth. Pigs were allowed to range freely in the forest, feeding off acorns and competing successfully with bear for prime acorn habitat. Prepared and served by Indian women or slaves, the new foods represented a true fusion of ingredients, cuisines, and serving styles.

By and large, most tavern meals were proteinheavy and ample. In 1826, Carl Bernhard, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, noted “no one is in danger of hunger on the lands of the Indians” as he recounted the menu at Kendall Lewis’s Tavern near the site of the abandoned Fort Bainbridge: “soup of turnips, roast-beef, a roast-turkey, venison with a kind of sour sauce, roast-chickens, and pork with sweet potatoes” (Bernhard 1828).

Lewis, a native of Maryland, was an Indian countryman (the term for a white man who took up residence among the Indians) who had married a Creek woman. His father-in-law was Big Warrior, a powerful Upper Creek chief who was head of the Creek National Council. Lewis’s was regarded as one of the best “stands” in the Creek Nation, and Mrs. Lewis was known for serving “excellent” food.

The Creek men and women who owned or operated the stands were part of a relatively new service industry created by the Federal Road, and Creeks were not unfamiliar with the work or service for hire. Since the beginning of European contact, they had sold wild game and produce to settlers and served as guides, messengers, and slave catchers in a growing exchange economy. But it was not until the advent of taverns and stands to support “paying guests” that Creek men became proprietors and Creek women became maids, cooks, and hostesses.

Drawing on European notions of service, they provided meals at set times using European pottery and utensils and charged guests a fee. These were new concepts to a people who knew no regular meal times, ate stews from a communal kettle with a communal spoon only when they were hungry, and were renowned for their generosity and hospitality to strangers.

Like Mrs. Lewis, who could roast beef as well as turkey, inventive Creek women adapted to the changing times and turned age-old techniques to new purposes, sometimes with mixed results.

Kendall Lewis’s father-in-law also operated a stand just down the Federal Road. In 1828, Reverend William S. Potts observed the manner in which the Creek women there prepared coffee—a method adapted from corn preparation using a traditional

mortar and sifter: “The coffee was poured into a hollowed stump, and beat with a stick of wood until mashed up, when it was sifted into a basket.”

The result was “thick” coffee. The Reverend Potts also declared the women’s ham and chicken dishes were “bad,” and their cornbread “very sour.” Creek women, who normally cooked meats for extended periods, may have served tough, lifeless meats to their guests. No doubt the bread was based on a traditional sour corn gruel that was aimed at pleasing the Creek cooks more than guests.

While Indians still hunted deer and turkeys and sold them to tavern keepers to supply their tables, the practice presented only a nominal method of subsisting in the new economy.

Instead, it was the non-Creek landlords, who bought cheaply from Indian hunters and sold to travelers, who profited from the traveling public.

For as one writer observed, in the absence of real competition, “the necessities of the traveller compel him to submit to any arbitrary charge” (Hodgson 1824).

As travel increased and taverns proliferated, the quality of the service and food improved, and many later travelers had praise for tavern meals.

While game and corn continued to be important to the regional table, it was the more traditional English foods that came to dominate the tavern tables

The Federal Road in Alabama, ca. 1815. Courtesy of the Center for Archaeological Studies, University of South Alabama.

and those of elite planters who made their fortunes raising cotton on land taken from the Indians.

And just as enslaved African Americans labored in the cotton fields, they labored in the kitchens, gradually replacing Indian women as cooks the same way that white proprietors and owners acquired control of the hospitality industry along the Federal Road. While foreigners like Hamilton and Stuart expected the lighter and more refined texture of wheat bread, Southerners in general had become by the 19th century accustomed and even fond of cornbread and grits, a variation of the Indian gruel known as sofkee.

The Federal Road, in large measure, was responsible for the destruction of the Creek Nation east of the Mississippi River and the transformation of their land from Indian to American territory. The Federal Road had divided the Creeks, leading to a civil war that destroyed virtually every town in the Upper Creek Nation. As the Creeks attempted to rebuild their lives and their wrecked economy, thousands of new American settlers traveled through their territory and settled among them.

Although the Creeks were resilient and changed with the times, Americans had little tolerance for their racial and ethnic differences. By the end of the 1830s, with the country well settled and steamboats plying the Alabama River, the Federal Road lost its 179 prominence as a major transportation and communication artery. By then, the early “stands” operated

by Creek Indians had been supplanted by inns and taverns run by ambitious businessmen and women.

By the late 1830s, Creeks in Alabama (including Kendall Lewis and his family) were forced to leave their ancestral homes. Ironically, most Creeks traveled westward to Indian Territory on the Federal Road, leaving behind the lyrical names they had originally given the land as well as traces of their traditional cuisine. The Federal Road had transformed the physical and cultural landscape, transforming the Creek Nation into the state of Alabama.

180

Visualizing Hunger

By Kathryn M. Floyd

The Lessons of Käthe Kollwitz

P

hotographs of people living in poverty or in the grip of starvation appear every day on our televisions and computer screens, in our newspapers and magazines, and in brochures publicizing philanthropic organizations and political causes.

The use of images to evoke compassion for the poor became common in reform-minded circles in the 19th century, when drawings, paintings, sculptures, and especially reproducible prints and photographs began to tackle hunger and poverty as modern problems in need of modern solutions.

Engaged journalists, for example, ventured into poor neighborhoods in cities like London or New York in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and conveyed stories of the hardship they found there

Käthe Kollwitz, Losbruch (Uprising, also known as Outbreak), 1902–03 Jule Collins Smith Museum of Fine Art, Auburn University. Museum purchase. 2010.05

in newspaper and magazine features. It was crucial to demonstrate the lack of resources, but not poor moral character of poverty’s victims (Vernon 30).

In this way, the journalist became not just the reporter of the problem, but the credible, and often compassionate, witness to its truth.

Photographs and other documentary materials still serve as some of the most powerful tools for communicating information about social problems. Beginning in the 19th century, photographic images by artists and journalists—for example, Jacob Riis and Lewis Hine’s portraits of poor mothers and children—illustrated statistics and translated hard data into visual narratives about real people, places, and situations.

Most important, photographs seemingly transformed audiences themselves into first-hand witnesses; viewers could be privy to real situations from a safe distance (Vernon 33). In this way, photographers functioned as transparent conduits, as witnesses who transported viewers to the environ-

ments of hunger and struggle or mediated between subject and viewer. One has only to look closely at Dorothea Lange’s portrait of Florence Thompson and her children, the iconic Migrant Mother of 1936, to understand the photograph’s simultaneous evoking of nearness and intimate access to this mother’s plight, and the photographer’s necessary “invisibility” in providing this unimpeded view.

In addition to the late 19th- and early 20thcentury work of documentary photographers like Riis, Hine, Lange, and others, artists working in more expressive media, like Käthe Kollwitz (1867-1945), also played a key role in the history of humanitarian images of hunger.

Kollwitz, a German artist, brought the problems of hunger and deprivation in Berlin’s working-class neighborhoods to light through her expressive style executed in evocative black and white drawings and prints, as well as in monumental sculptural works that illuminated the difficult realities of the homeless. Just as crucial to her

181

message, her images also make manifest the artist’s own powerful actions in the fight against poverty and hunger through the bold, sweeping lines from which her figures materialize. Her broad and gestural, yet simple and strong, marks formulate the bodies of her subjects in the midst of their plight but also trace her own physical, mental, and emotional thoughts and actions in response to those problems, showing her clear engagement with these social issues.

In many of Kollwitz’s works we see human figures linked together, as their outlines merge to create a sense of interconnectivity and community. In a sense, Kollwitz, too, links 182 her own body to those of her figures through the traces of her physicality in the image and occasionally the use of her own self-portrait within her images of the downtrodden. In the powerful and iconic image Bread! (Brot!), a lithograph produced in 1924, Kollwitz presents the frantic hunger of a woman and her two starving children. Kollwitz’s gestural marks, in particular the long, bold, downward strokes that give form to the mother’s skirt and emphasize the pleading grip of her children, express the energetic actions of the artist’s hand in bringing this image to life. The call of Brot! is a call not just to awareness but also to empathy and action.

As the Nazis rose to power, Kollwitz became increasingly marginalized as an Expressionist artist and progressive individual under their oppressive regime. Although in 1919 she had become the first woman elected to the Prussian Academy of Art, she was stripped, along with writer Heinrich Mann, of her academy position in 1933 when Hitler seized power in Germany. In 1936, the same year Lange produced her masterful Migrant Mother photograph, authorities banned the exhibition of Kollwitz’s works in Germany due to her bold subject matter and anti-fascist political associations.

That same year, the Gestapo interrogated her in her home. For the last decade of her life she wrestled with the problem of how to live and how to create art in this dangerous environment. Her unstable situation began to parallel the lives of the poor who had always been at the center of her work. She died in 1945 having witnessed the most harrowing decades of modern German history, which are recorded in her diaries and letters.

Kollwitz was born in Königsberg, Germany, into the middle-class Schmidt family who were members of the progressive, inclusive, and tolerant Free Protestant Congregation led by Kollwitz’s uncle Julius Rupp. Her family, which educated its children at home, valued her intellectual and artistic pursuits as well as the development of her social consciousness.

The Schmidt family’s open-minded attitudes allowed the young Käthe to experience both the beauty and coarseness of her city. In 1881, her father sent the 14-year-old Kollwitz to take art lessons with a local engraver and four years later encouraged her attendance at the School for Women Artists in Berlin, where she studied painting.

As a student and emerging artist in the late 19th century, Kollwitz came into direct contact with the international literary and visual style known as Naturalism, which attempted to illustrate modern life and living in all its stark and gritty realities.

Kollwitz’s first mature encounters with the hungry and poverty-stricken came through such artistic sources that depicted the poor as characters in dramas celebrating their “authentic” lifeways and critiquing the inequities of capitalist society.

Kollwitz later recounted that she was first drawn to workers, the proletariat, and the poor primarily through a broad sense of their freedom, dignity, and grandness, even in the face of their problems (Kollwitz 44). Only later did she transform this generalized, romantic idea into specific knowledge of the real lives of poor individuals with complex circumstances.

Some of the earliest praise Kollwitz received as a young artist was for her work inspired by Zola’s novel Germinal, the story of a poor young miner

and budding socialist who leads a strike in protest of the poor living and working conditions in his town. In 1888, Kollwitz produced a stark image of a scene in a bar prompted by Zola’s narrative but based on her own studies in an actual Königsberg tavern. She ultimately planned an entire cycle of prints inspired by the novel. Zola’s story reignited Kollwitz’s earlier interests in the working-class people from her childhood and also linked her to the most current artistic tendencies of the day.

Kollwitz’s second important literary source for her early interest in images of the poor came when she saw the 1893 Berlin premier of Gerhard Hauptmann’s The Weavers, a fictional account of the mid-19th-century German weavers’ rebellion.

Kollwitz had once met Hauptmann in Berlin and was now bowled over by his meaningful dramatic critique of the social ills produced by the industrial revolution. She immediately stopped work on her Germinal series and began a set of six prints based on Hauptmann’s play. Desolate images entitled Poverty (1895), Death (1897), and End (1897) imagine the bent and lifeless bodies of the weavers who struggle to cope with their poor living conditions, deep hunger, and oppressive work.

But not all the images portray subjects in a state of hopeless suffering. Prints such as March of the Weavers and Storming the Gate show individuals

taking direct action against their plight. These works depicted communities of people literally bound to each other by her expressive lines and tight, economic compositions held together by strong outlines and contours. Bodies visually merge in these images as the figures become a true “body politic” active and engaged in support of a common cause or against a common enemy.

With these images Kollwitz became firmly committed to shining a light on the problems of the poor and hungry, but the Weaver’s cycle transformed her career in other ways, too. In 1898 the jury of the Greater Berlin Art Exhibition nominated the series for a gold medal. But Kaiser Wilhelm II kept the bold work from receiving a prize; Kollwitz’s direct, unflinching imagery and revolutionary themes were considered subversive by the Kaiser (Prelinger 30). Nevertheless, the art world in Berlin took notice. Kollwitz began teaching at her former women’s art academy. Collectors and museum officials began to buy her work. She exhibited regularly and received prizes.

Incredibly, she achieved this early period of success while raising two young boys, Hans, born in 1892, and Peter, born four years later in 1896, as her husband worked long hours in his medical practice. The young couple had settled in 1891 in a working-class neighborhood in Berlin so that Karl

might live near his patients—the real-life counterparts of the working class types Kollwitz imagined in her well-received prints and drawings.

In her memoirs, Kollwitz wrote that these early successes came to her “as a surprise” (43).

Indeed, her accounts of her life show an artist full of typical human doubts, insecurities, and hesitations about life. She was often unsure of her abilities as a wife and mother, but these familial worries paled in comparison to her concerns about working, her goals and her value as an engaged artist. She compared her own waxing and waning efforts to her husband’s untiring labors at home and in his clinic, noting that his consistent sacrifices for her and for his patients were possible because “his stock of love and kindness is inexhaustible” (61). Her work could be slow and plodding, interspersed with periods of complete inactivity or bursts of productivity.

She constantly questioned her choice of career and the importance and impact of her art.

For Kollwitz, her work was innately tied to her own development as a responsible and engaged “self,” and to the ethics of living as a human being in a difficult world, as much as it was about making visual the problems and circumstances of poor people. Thoughts about these challenges fill the pages of her diaries and letters and are also

183

embodied in her many self-portraits or “selfimages,” as she called them (Seeler 10).

Kollwitz’s contemplative personality soon led her to reconsider her understanding of poverty and hunger in her art, which had initially been tied to “romantic” or literary ideas about the proletariat.

As her husband grew his medical practice and became one of the busiest public health insurance doctors in the city, Kollwitz began to know his patients personally, many from the working and lower classes (Kearns 106). They would come to Kollwitz for guidance. Through these personal contacts, her empathy for the poor deepened beyond her initial aesthetic, distanced interest in 184 their forms and types and she began to consider the intricacies of their problems through a new perspective. As her son Hans later wrote, “she was never able to observe the miseries of others without taking them into herself. That was the reason people told her their troubles...” (Kollwitz 8).

She especially came to know the particular struggles of women and mothers with whom she deeply identified, especially after the loss of her eldest son in the war. “When I met the women who came to my husband for help and so, incidentally came to me,” she wrote, “I was gripped by the full force of the proletarian’s fate. Unsolved problems such as prostitution and unemployment grieved

me and tormented me, and contributed to my feeling that I must keep on with my studies of the lower classes. And portraying them again and again opened a safety-valve for me; it made life bearable” (43).

As Kollwitz began to more deeply understand the real challenges the poor and the importance of public response, her style and technique became simpler, more economic, and more powerful.

While each image from her early Germinal and Weaver’s Rebellion series offered a fully developed mise-en-scène and often depicted a degree of narrative action, her works began to focus more on strongly expressed single bodies emerging from unarticulated backgrounds or figures bound together by bold outlines into tight groups and monumental closed forms. The dark lines that created the forms of her figures became reduced in number but also broader, more intense, and more gestural, evoking not just her oppressed subjects, but also the struggle and force of her own response to their plight. She made direct and immediate charcoal drawings; sharply cut woodcut prints; and dark, saturated lithographs of families and workers, mothers and children, the demoralized and the revolutionary, and the living and dead.

Kollwitz did not shy away from difficult subjects. In one image we see the ghostly face of a female “homeworker” slumped over her worktable,

exhausted from the endless hours of toil. In another, a pregnant but gaunt mother waits with her infant and toddler to see the doctor. But while many of Kollwitz’s works show suffering, the strength of her bold, active marks also gives her figures a sense of strength and dignity. Kollwitz’s images of groups and communities express a monumentality and presence that insert a sense of hope and optimism into their darkness. In a few images, we see happy moments in which smiling mothers cradle their children or families laugh and greet each other warmly.

Kollwitz’s compelling style and expressive approach proved highly useful in posters and announcements for aid organizations and political causes.

Indeed, in 1910s and 20s Germany, the style of Activist Expressionism, as scholar Sherwin Simmons calls it, was an important mode used by artistic circles linked to progressive politics. This agitational art communicated “utopian revolutionary concepts” in an innovative, avant-garde style (147). Originating in particular in the wake of the failed Communist revolution in Germany in 1918 and 1919, the use of artistic strategies to critique power or to communicate ideals of reform and change offered a non-violent, centrist solution, and a moderate position that could counterbalance more extreme, often violent, forms of political

revolution. In this sense, “art—rather than revolution—was empowered with bringing about social reform” (Weinstein 41).

In this context of activist aesthetics, Kollwitz, too, thought much about how art should best communicate and connect with its audience, especially in terms of its social and political engagement.

Also related to modern advertising strategies, her economic, essential compositions and simplified, reduced subjects appealed to the eye in a direct way and were highly legible to viewers. This economy of form and subject was not meant to create a superficial art but rather to express complex ideas in their simplest terms and reach out to the audience, whether educated or not, about art and culture. As Kollwitz stated, “Art for the average spectator need not be shallow” (68).

Like her fellow activist expressionists, Kollwitz believed strongly that, above all, art should be engaged in society and its progress. Artists and art, they believed, should be active participants in the betterment of society. She hoped through her art to be “a direct mediator between people and something they are not conscious of ” (81). And when she achieved success as a major German artist, she wished for her important efficacy to live on through her images. “If my works continue to make such an impression, even after decades,” she

wrote, after having attended her 50th anniversary retrospective exhibition in 1917, “then I will have achieved a great deal. Then men will have been enriched by me … From so many sides I am being told that my work has value, that I have accomplished something...” (81-82).

Kollwitz’s powerful engagement with her subjects and compelling modes of communicating with viewers, however, made Kollwitz a target in the rising totalitarian political landscape of interwar Germany. Innovative, avant-garde practitioners, along with other left-leaning artists, were persecuted under the cultural policies of the National Socialists. Museums were emptied of modernist and “foreign” works of art, which were labeled ”degenerate” and eventually sold or destroyed. Artists were banned from working or displaying their artworks publically and privately. Cultural figures like Kollwitz, and especially Jewish and Communist individuals, were forced out of their jobs teaching or working in institutions like museums, theaters, and orchestras. Some left Germany and found new homes in places like Great Britain or the United States. Many, to the world’s great loss, were killed in the war or murdered in the camps before the war came to a horrific end in 1945.

Kollwitz was not allowed to exhibit her art publically after 1936, but she was also not entirely

banned from working, although the loss of her position at the Prussian Academy of Art in 1933 meant the loss of necessary studio space, especially as her sculptural works had become important components of her practice. Instead, she found space in the secluded Atelierklosterstrasse, a diverse community of artists working quietly in a studio building on the eastern side of Berlin not far from busy Alexanderplatz. By this point she was aging, tired, and her fame, once great, had been driven underground by the oppressive authorities. In her new studio she found the space to continue working, but her age, declining finances, and marginalized status made it difficult. “I am gradually realizing now that I have come to the end of my 185 working life,” she wrote in her diary (125).

In 1941, with her husband now deceased, she gave up her studio space and moved back into her apartment building, where she continued to work when she could, still with a sense of duty to her subject matter and audiences: “Here at home, where my working room is also my sleeping room and where I have everything I need all crowded together and handy, I can work whenever I feel strong enough to do so...There are still so many things to be completed” (175). Kollwitz died four years later, near the end of the war, in 1945 at age 77.

Crossing Borders, Changing Lives

186

By Karen Hunley

Auburn Engineering Students Help Establish Food Security in Bolivian Village

F

armers, students, and others in the village of Quesimpuco in Bolivia experienced a first last August with the help of Auburn University students and professors. They turned on a water sprinkler for the very first time.

“It was actually a very emotional moment,” says Steve Duke, an associate professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering at Auburn.

Duke serves as faculty adviser for an Auburn engineering student service organization, the group that helped Bolivia reach this milestone.

Auburn students worked side-by-side with Quechua students from Quesimpuco to install the first sprinkler head after spending the year before the trip planning the irrigation installation and building demos.

“The water sources that used to feed many of their croplands dried up because of seismic activities, so they weren’t able to keep the croplands watered,” Duke says. “Now they can get water to those terraces, and because they happen to

have very good soil, they can grow bean crops and other high-protein foods.”

The Auburn team has collaborated with Servants in Faith and Technology (SIFAT) on its Quesimpuco outreach projects for the last four years. Based in Lineville, Alabama, SIFAT is a nonprofit organization that provides community development training in countries with great physical, spiritual, social, and/or economic needs. In turn, SIFAT partners with the Bolivian nongovernmental organization CENATEC—the Spanish acronym for National Center of Technology for Integrated Development—to coordinate Auburn’s projects.

The Auburn service organization began in 2008, with Duke and a group of about 14 students that met each week at Ross Hall to pore over plans and ideas for how to take their engineering skills beyond U.S. borders. Duke initiated the group after learning about Engineers Without BordersUSA (EWB-USA) and approaching then-dean of

Engineering Larry Benefield to talk about starting a service learning organization for engineering students at Auburn. At the same time, two Auburn University engineering alumni had returned from Bolivia after building a bridge and asked the same question as Duke—why doesn’t an EWB-USA chapter or similar organization exist at Auburn?

It was perfect timing, recalls Duke. The organization anticipates receiving official recognition as an EWB-USA chapter in 2014.

Working with SIFAT, along with local farming federations in Bolivia, the founding group of students began devising plans for two major projects to help improve food security for Bolivians by helping them develop the croplands and infrastructure to incorporate more nutrient-rich produce into their diets. This included an irrigation system for 40 to 80 acres of terraces as well as hydroponics installation.

During the first few years of the partnership, the Auburn team helped site a location for the

187

188

irrigation tank and designed the infrastructure of the irrigation system, communicating often with their overseas partners via Skype. From 20122013, the Quechua built the tank themselves—still with online support from Duke and the Auburn students—as they prepared for Auburn’s next visit.

Though the Auburn team has been to Bolivia every year since 2010, August 2013 was the most construction-intensive visit so far, as they

completed the irrigation installation and turned on the sprinkler head that showered the fruitful terraces in Quesimpuco for the first time. It was also the first visit when the Americans and the Quechua seemed to feel completely at ease with each other, Duke says.

“On this fourth trip, when we got out of the Jeeps in Quesimpuco, they trusted us and we trusted them,” Duke says. “They knew we were

coming back, and we knew they’d been working hard on the projects. There’s a good, strong partnership now.”

The second project, a hydroponics demonstration, is made up of four wooden beds filled with substrate and filled with barley grass seeds. Nutrient-rich water flows down from one bed to the next and is collected at the bottom of the structure so it be can reused. The grass is intended as feed for guinea pigs—a very high-protein source of food that can help fill significant gaps in the Quechuas’ diet. Students also designed and constructed a Dutch buckets hydroponics system for growing tomatoes. This, too, will be a welcome addition to staple foods potatoes and onions, which are easy to grow and plentiful but not very high in nutrients.

The two hydroponics systems serve as models and education demonstrations for area farmers.

Duke says he takes personal responsibility for making sure students engage in this type of service learning. “I think my job is to help young men and women become engineers, and the best way to do that is to give them real problems with real people,” he says.

Despite this teaching philosophy, students cannot earn course credit for being a part of the service group. They have to pay their own way to Bolivia. The meetings and project tasks are

time-consuming and mentally taxing in addition to their other course work. And out in the fields of Quesimpuco, the work can be hot and backbreaking.

Mary Robbins, who now holds a doctorate in civil engineering, joined the organization as a graduate student in 2010 and traveled to Quesimpuco twice. She says she had a strong desire to “step out of the bubble” on campus and see what she was “really capable of as an engineer.” Helping a community meet its basic need for food access was also part of her drive.

But it wasn’t just about supplying food to the Quechua and then hopping on a plane to come home, Robbins emphasizes. “Hunger is a complex and widespread problem. Simply supplying food is generally not the answer,” she says. “If the community does not have the resources or the ability to obtain adequate nutrition, the problem will persist when the aid runs out. So projects like the ones this group is working on, which work with the community to improve yields so they can provide for themselves, is a much more sustainable solution.”

When Auburn students began to brainstorm about potential projects, they must not only develop solutions—they must develop solutions that are both long-term and appropriate for the location

and the skill set of the community that will be using and maintaining the new technology, Robbins adds. The students are already immersed in the next project in Quesimpuco, having surveyed a site during the 2013 trip for another tank that will feed a second irrigation system.

“I think students accept this challenge because they truly want to make a difference,” Robbins says. “Being able to take part in something bigger than yourself and see that you can really make a difference in another person’s life is just an absolutely amazing feeling.”

189

Magic City Agriculture Project

By Zac Henson

190

Research in Action

I

t is a stereotype that the South is more racist than the rest of the nation. However, the history of slavery and Jim Crow make race in the South a particularly heated topic, so much so that both blacks and whites tend not to discuss the issue in mixed company, though they do so often with people of their own race.

I have my own struggles with race and racism.

My background is working class and white. We have a long, destructive, and ugly history of enforcing racial norms. We supported slavery because planters gave us special privileges, like the ability to own land. We started the Ku Klux Klan to enforce black codes and, later, Jim Crow segregation.

I deal with this by studying it, by attempting to transform my own “Southernness” into some sort of anti-racist culture. I investigate race-dividing processes in Birmingham in an attempt to change them and, in turn, change myself. I want to reinvent myself and, by extension, what it means to be a working-class, white Southerner to create true

solidarity among workers of Alabama. Uniting in this way could potentially change the state. My research is not politically neutral—it is positioned to promote change both culturally and politically, as the two are intricately intertwined.

So how is this politically engaged research carried out? One method is called critical participatory action research. While there are many different takes on the correct methodology, my work focuses on creating a research process beneficial to my community partners—in this case, nonprofit, community-based organizations in western Birmingham. Traditional research sees a divide between the researcher and the subject of the research. This divide is dehumanizing since it sets up an unequal power relationship between the researcher and the subject. The subject passively answers questions that are chosen by the researcher and lack any say in how the research is conducted.

In contrast to traditional research, I chose to help my community partners in their programming

and initiatives by gleaning information passively and informally through teaching a GED class, working in the garden, writing grants, engaging policy, or attending public meetings.

This methodology led to the creation of an anti-racist, food justice nonprofit to both aid communities in creating gardens and other community development activities and to fill a much-needed gap in advocating for an anti-racist perspective.

This nonprofit, Magic City Agriculture Project (MCAP), is to my knowledge the only food justice nonprofit in Alabama. MCAP is a response to the three processes investigated in this research—racialization, commoning, and capital accumulation.

I will discuss these three and then return to how MCAP addresses these processes.

Racialization Racialization is the process by which difference is created to justify the control of one group by another. This process produces space. Racialization’s

191

spatial aspect can be seen in the shift scales of black oppression through the past 500 years. Slavery oppressed blacks at the individual body level, Jim Crow at the neighborhood level, and residential segregation at the metropolitan level.

Birmingham has the highest levels of residential segregation in the South and the 15th highest in the nation. As a result, blacks and whites live in very different spaces, lead very different lives, and have very different cultures. Black and white institutions and organizations have different practices and cultures. This makes creating citywide initiatives and diverse organizations exceedingly difficult.

In 2009 and 2010 a group of nonprofits and the 192 Jefferson County Department of Health received a large grant to tackle obesity. Part of the money from this grant was to be used to create the Birmingham-Jefferson Food Policy Council (BJFPC).

However, the nonprofits that were part of creating the BJFPC were almost exclusively white-dominated. The group convened a committee to draft a food charter to lay the ideological foundations of the BJFPC, and of the thirty to forty participants at the meeting (the number varied from meeting to meeting) only about five were non-whites. This is striking in a city that is 73 percent black and a county that is 39 percent black. Twenty-one mem-

bers were chosen for the BJFPC; five are black. The organizers recognized the lack of the diversity but struggled for solutions.

Capital Accumulation Downtown Birmingham is undergoing a dramatic, celebrated transition. The space is being transformed from commuter-centric space to a space to “live, work, and play.” But this has not come without consequences. The demolition of the public housing community Metropolitan Gardens and its replacement with the Hope VI mixed-income housing project Park Place resulted in the net loss of 571 units of low-income housing and the displacement of almost all of Metropolitan Gardens’ residents. These residents were almost exclusively black.

The transformation of Birmingham’s downtown space is done with one goal in mind—capital accumulation. Spaces must be produced that are amenable to increased flows of capital. In the central city, this has occurred mainly through the transformation of buildings into owner-occupied housing. It has been aided by the creation of a large park, Railroad Park, and a baseball stadium, Regions Field. The consequences have been an almost 90 percent increase in housing values, as compared to a 5 percent increase in the black neighborhoods

of West End and southwest Birmingham, and a 38 percent increase in the wealthy suburbs of Mountain Brook and Homewood. Combined with the loss of low-income housing, blacks are being priced out of downtown.

Research on gentrification suggests that this type of thinking about urbanity attracts primarily whites. It is municipal trickle-down economics, in which the goal is to attract wealthy, mostly white people back to the city and have their buying power flow to people with lower incomes. Given that Birmingham’s primary employer is the University of Alabama-Birmingham, a medical school, and that healthcare and health-related professions are the primary industry, it is more than likely that new residents will be white professionals.

The local food movement has successfully created a legitimate culture by instilling a preference for downtown living because of the closeness to food venues, farmers’ markets, and urban gardens.

The preference for high-end foods is backed by health-related nonprofits and government institutions, and the movement acts as both a practice and a culture associated with that practice.

The promotion of the foodie culture firmly situates middle-class and wealthy foodies as the dominant culture. Within this culture are deep-seated notions of the “right food”—locally sourced food

purchased at a farmer’s market, or at least fruits and vegetables that are cooked in a particular way.

Magic City Agriculture Project: Research in Practice MCAP grew out of this research process. Our strategy consists of community development or “commoning.” In technical terms, we help community-based organizations create their own space. We are basically a group of community organizers who “reweave the fabric of community,” in the words of one of our board members. We are a diverse organization—five of our eight board members are people of color, four are black. Our members range from elders, to middle-aged, to youth. Twenty-five percent of our members identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT), and half are women. We are founded on a philosophy of anti-racism, a process that seeks to reveal to communities the underlying processes of white supremacy. Our partners are two community-based organizations in Birmingham, one in Southside and the other in Hillman Station. We have three programs, the anti-racist program, the oral history project, and the urban agriculture program Our anti-racist program challenges participants to think critically about institutional racism and

white supremacy. We draw a sharp distinction between the way racism is characterized by popular culture and the notion of institutionalized racism.

We try to help people recognize that racism, or the marrying of institutional power and prejudice, is part and parcel to the way that our society is organized rather than just individual acts of overt bigotry.

While the latter are important, most racial oppression happens through systems like the education, healthcare, agriculture, and judicial systems. Through our anti-racist trainings, participants go through a process of “decolonization” in which they begin to unlearn knowledge about racism and begin to understand and address institutional racism and white supremacy. One of the ways we address this institutional racism is through community organizing. Community-organizing training is a part of our anti-racist trainings.

Our approach to community organizing relies on keeping the lines of communication with neighborhood leaders open at all times. As outsiders, our organization must be deliberate about how we listen to community leaders, ensuring that we are not enforcing our agenda, but helping communities with programs of their design. In Birmingham, community development organizations have often made the mistake

of coming into communities and prescribing programs or initiatives without first building a partnership that allows both organizations to work together to meet the needs of particular neighborhoods. We do this through a technical assistance approach. We help write grants, provide some management for the garden, and advocate for policy changes that will aid already existing programs. We use our specific skills appropriately for the desires, needs, and assets of the communities in which we work.

Our urban agriculture program is in its infant stages. We operate a garden on the Southside of Birmingham, and we aid in managing a garden in southwest Birmingham. Our future goals are to start differernt forms of agricultural cooperatives with our partner organizations.

Long term, we would like to start aquaponics cooperatives throughout the city. The importance of cooperatives is that they are worker-owned, meaning that profits are shared by the workers, and the business is managed and directed wholly by the members of the cooperative. This would bring both workplace democracy and a living wage to Birmingham, something that is sorely lacking since the demise of the steel industry. We want to start an urban beekeeping cooperative because of the success of such enterprises in

193

commoning. We attempt to use commoning or community development to push back against capital accumulation and racialization. Specifically, we try to produce a different type of space, a sort of counter-space. Future work leads more into the policy world, trying to curb processes of gentrification and segregation in favor of policies that promote commoning. We will also look into securing land so that we can start aquaponics cooperatives, increase our donor base, and develop a more appropriate fundraising strategy. other cities such as Chicago and because there is relatively little upfront capital investment.

Aquaponics cooperatives would be viable further 194 down the road, but with a more significant capital investment. Aquaponics is a combination of aquaculture and hydroponics, a system which addresses the weakness of both. Aquaculture’s weakness is that fish waste dirties the water.

Hydroponics’ weakness is that it requires chemical inputs to fertilize the plants. In aquaponics, fish wastes fertilize the plants and plants clean the water, requiring very little in the way of external inputs. Aquaponics is also highly productive on relatively small square footage, making it perfectly suited for urban settings.

Through all of our programs, we address racialization, capital accumulation, and

Conclusion Like the environmental movement, the alternative food and agriculture movement is overwhelmingly white. Many mistakes of the environmental movement are being repeated by the food movement. In Birmingham, the spectre of segregation and gentrification—and the movement’s complicity in both—exacerbates racial division. This is not just a problem around race but, frankly, an issue of effective strategy and tactics for the movement.

Thus far, movement actors have built power by networking and building alliances almost exclusively within the white community. To some degree this is changing because of the black and diverse organizations working within black communities. However, most forms of direct action are off

the table, and the language available for organizers to talk about food is severely circumscribed because they have to adhere to the technocratic and nominally apolitical language and practices dictated by powerful organizations located squarely within the white community.

The correct strategy to address segregation, and the strategy that MCAP advocates is bottom-up economic development in all black, low-income neighborhoods. This could take the form of cooperatives, which is our strategy, but it could also take the form of attracting high-paying, unionized jobs to these areas. There are empty industrial parks throughout Birmingham just waiting on tenants.

There is no reason why Birmingham can’t shift course away from consumption-led development to production-side development.

Only after low-income black neighborhoods are brought out of poverty can whites be coaxed back into the city. By building up black neighborhoods first, the power differential between blacks and whites would be minimized, mitigating the effects of gentrification. Whites moving back to the city should also undergo anti-racist training and get involved with the neighborhood associations. This sort of “smart integration” should be the agenda for the city, instead of the conventional wisdom of gentrification.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

195

C

ommunity development organizations sometimes make the mistake of prescribing programs without first building a partnership.

Collaboration and trust are essential for lasting change.

P

R

OFI

L

E

Toni Alexander

Food Allowed in Class

by Jay Lamar

196

Take a California girl who never really thought she would go to college. Put her in a geography class at Cal State Stanislaus. Life and work suddenly come into sharp focus. Fast forward through a master’s and a Ph.D. at Louisiana State and find her teaching, innovatively and with deep dedication to her students, in the Geology and Geography Department at Auburn.

Toni Alexander, associate professor of cultural geography, says her career has been surprising.

Not only did she not expect to go to college—she would be the first person in her family to do so— she also did not see herself becoming a teacher and scholar. However, hundreds of students are glad she did.

Widely recognized for her efforts to attract female faculty to campus, increase the number of young women involved in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines, and

promote diversity on campus, Alexander is also a core faculty member in the Auburn University Food Systems Institute. To it she brings her expertise in cultural geography.

Distinct from physical geography, which studies landforms, climate, waterways, and other aspects of the earth as a physical space, cultural geography is also known as human geography. It is fundamentally about how humans live, work, and interact on earth. A cultural geographer may study language, religion, economy, government, and other cultural phenomena, focusing on how they vary or remain constant across space and time.

If this seems to cast a wide net, that is just natural. In fact, as the department’s website notes: “As scientists, geographers are naturally curious about how the world is arranged. They ask lots of questions about why things are located the way they are and then they try to answer those questions.”

Alexander’s classes reflect her interests in various areas of human geography; her lower-division classes include Global Geography and Cultural Geography. She also teaches upper-division courses on the topics of Urban Geography and Economic Geography. In part, it is how she teaches them that distinguishes her classes. She takes asking questions about why things are the way they are to heart.

She also brings to her classes, and to AUFSI, a clear vision of the unique and undeniable importance of food in culture.

“Food is a basic human right,” Alexander says.

“Of course, we can’t live without it. But even more than that, it ties us to places and people in ways that, when you examine them, are windows into history, society, economics, language, health— really everything that makes a culture.”

Alexander impresses this on her students through several assignments, but one is emblematic of both her teaching style and the potential she sees in food to tell us about ourselves. It is called The Recipe Project.

Alexander has her students pick a recipe. It can be anything from apple cake to na’an to groundnut stew. And it can be from anywhere: from Grandmother’s recipe box to an exotic foreign cuisine.

Students then research the place where the recipe originates, learning its geography and history, and gaining insight into its political and social structure. Students then research their recipe’s ingredients, answering questions about where they come from, how they are grown, and how they are processed. The answers might entail information about climate and land use. For instance, why is Australia a good location for raising sheep, and what does this say about the prevalence of mutton

in its national cuisine? Another recipe might require an understanding of how rice is harvested. All will inform the researcher on what specific ingredients say about specific economies: what dictates the average cost of codfish, for instance, and how is that reflected in the fisherman’s economy?

Students then explore the ways in which the ingredients are prepared. Are they butchered, breaded, chopped, diced, or peeled? Are they seasoned? If so, with what and where do the spices called for in the recipe come from? What techniques are used in combining ingredients: blending, mashing, whipping?

Finally, students must investigate how the dish is served. Specific traditions and cultural practices—even religious beliefs—can inform what food is eaten and the ways in which it is served and consumed. These vary widely, of course, but learning about them brings insight into everything from why men and women do or don’t eat together to why some malaria-prone places encourage the consumption of fava beans.

The papers that result from this assignment might consider issues of hunger, access, class, and race. They may look at historic trade routes or the growing globalization of food distribution. They may indicate where cultures have shared cuisines, and whether they have done so as a result of con197 quest or colonization.

No matter what shape a student’s recipe project might ultimately take, you can bet that it will be a learning experience.

“Every part of our lives is driven by food,” notes Alexander. “Learning about a place and a people through their food stuffs and food ways teaches my students to see the deep interconnectedness of land, people, and culture. I hope that is something that stays with them throughout their lives.”

Tackling Organizational Challenges 198

By Daniel Henry and Kate Thornton

Hunger Solutions Institute and United Nations World Food Programme

I

n 2004, the United Nations World Food Programme—the world’s largest humanitarian organization—approached Auburn University about being the organization’s lead academic partner. Over the past decade, this partnership has grown into a movement known worldwide as Universities Fighting World Hunger, which includes more than 300 colleges and universities across the globe. At Auburn, the partnership sparked the creation of the Committee of 19, the Campus Kitchens project, the hunger studies academic minor, and most recently, the Hunger Solutions Institute in the College of Human Sciences.

Known as the “911” of the world, the World Food Programme (WFP) responds to all major humanitarian crises around the globe, including the 2008 earthquake in Haiti, the 2010 floods in Pakistan, and the 2012 drought and subsequent famine in the Sahel region of Africa. In late 2013, WFP was at the forefront of feeding the victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines.

Last year, a special opportunity arose for the Hunger Solutions Institute at Auburn to be involved with a project that helped evaluate organizational learning and understanding of WFP emergency operations over more than a decade of emergency responses. The project became the main research project of Auburn’s Hunger Studies capstone class. The research team consisted of professors and students, for whom a prerequisite was the course called “Hunger: Causes, Consequences, and Responses.” Jointly developed by Auburn faculty and a WFP Diplomat-in-Residence, the course provided an understanding of global hunger issues, including the causes of and attempts to alleviate hunger. The course also imparted an understanding of WFP and the larger humanitarian community. Kate Thornton, the current class instructor and co-research lead, manages and teaches courses in Auburn University’s minor in hunger studies—one of the few such minors in academia. Dan Henry, an authority on qualitative

research, joined her and eight students, plus one graduate student, in this research.

Together, they tackled more than 1,500 pages of unstructured data provided by the Preparedness and Response Enhancement Programme (PREP), located in the Emergency Preparedness Division of WFP. The term “unstructured data” refers to a mass of information lacking the formal organizational structure one finds on, for example, a financial spreadsheet or a nutrition panel on the side of a cereal box. The Auburn team was looking at a myriad of unorganized documents related to disasters occurring between 1999 and 2011.

The documents included everything from comprehensive reports of disasters to bulleted notes from various WFP field offices to Excel spreadsheets outlining the timelines and responses to a given disaster. The documents also included after-action reviews and lessons-learned exercises.

While WFP did have a process of formal learning from each of these disasters, no narrative had been

199

pulled from the collection of unstructured data. As a part of a larger United Nations initiative pushing for increased evidence of prudent use of physical and financial resources, as well as organizational learning over time, this project enabled Auburn students and faculty to engage in solving real-world hunger-related issues as well as provide a meaningful analysis for WFP. The project offered an unusual opportunity: the chance to involve undergraduate students in research that was not only directly applicable to what they were doing in class, but that also linked the work on a real-world problem to stakeholders who would use the results. The results would inform 200 and impact the way WFP delivered food and other necessities to parts of the world in crisis.

Research Process As noted, this project involved a large volume of documents. In addition, these documents were in many forms, including evaluation reports, conference proceedings, and in some cases, spreadsheets containing qualitative data. The challenge was to find common threads in data compiled over more than a decade. A particularly useful tool was the use of “grounded theory,” a way of making connections and generating theory from data, pioneered

by Glaser and Strauss in 1967. Grounded theory

uses an inductive process to build themes directly linked to the data.

The research team was trained in the process of analyzing documents through a detailed and recognized coding system structured in order to let themes emerge directly from the data. After developing an understanding of grounded theory and the coding system, the team then began using ATLAS.ti to begin the coding process. This software allows users to analyze and code documents electronically and then generates reports that accurately represent the collected data.

A student facilitator provided leadership and structure to the group, keeping the project on schedule and maintaining communication within the group. Students did an initial coding pass on one of the documents assigned to them, identifying key words or phrases as significant and pertaining to a unique theme. Such themes initially included “money,” “communication,” “management,” and “infrastructure.”

After a few days of coding, the facilitator led a group discussion, and the group decided on a deadline to complete the analysis and coding phase of the project. In the following meeting, the team discussed the different kinds of codes that had been created and the importance of creating unique codes when new topics emerged. Codes were collapsed into like categories, which then expanded as more documents were coded, and then expanded again and collapsed again, in an iterative process. After a few sessions, a common set of codes was finalized.

Throughout the process, communication was maintained with WFP through frequent phone calls and email. This allowed WFP to check on the team’s progress and make sure the research would be useful in answering its questions about the data. Additionally, a WFP representative sat in on the discussion as code lists were developed,

offering guidance about WFP expectations. During the discussion, the team selected the major topics to include in its report, selected because the data collected from the coded documents showed them to be significant to WFP’s organizational learning during the time. Having gathered all necessary data, the team generated an outline and compiled a report describing the study’s findings.

Results The analyzed data allowed researchers to explore changes and trends within each emergency, across different types of emergencies, and across the time period represented in the documents. Their report detailed findings in various areas: • Coordination—The effective establishment and implementation of the UN Cluster System (and WFP’s role in it) was noted as a significant improvement in interagency coordination.

• Security—The issue of the security of staff was a strong theme in earlier documents, but improvements were noted in later documents.

• Programming—Programming, especially Cash and Vouchers and other targeted use of incentive beneficiary distribution programs, was seen as a continuing improvement.

• Contingency planning, advance purchase, and pre-positioning—WFP improved its ability to purchase in advance and preposition support; when in place, these actions significantly decreased response time and quality of emergency actions.

• Accountable, flexible, and transparent— Although improvements were noted in these areas, these three issues were noted as very important, with a need to improve tools, processes, and policies to improve accountability, flexibility, and transparency.

• Early warning—Issues of logistics in predicting crises and responding to early warnings about such crises were an important theme.

The data also indicated that WFP, like many large organizations, needed to improve some aspects of its operations. Categories that could be improved included funding and donor relations; communication; improving the data system; structural improvements in WFP operations, including policies and procedures; deficits in staff deployment; and training. Finally, the data indicated that an emergency response roster, a tool that staff had found very useful in the past for mobilizing resources, should be reinstated.

• Self-assessment—WFP was commended for its improvements in self-assessment and in being a learning organization, especially through lessons learned in recent emergencies.

• Beneficiary focus—A consistent focus on beneficiary needs was commended, but it was noted that targeting was not always accurate. There were many causes for delays in reaching beneficiaries, from donor delay to staff deployment difficulties, but WFP was recognized for its consistent focus on the goal.

• Nutrition—There is a relatively new focus on beneficiary needs, with an emphasis on readyto-use foods. But there always is a struggle in stretching resources between feeding more people with less nutritious food and feeding fewer people with food of higher nutritional quality.

Sharing the Results WFP invited students who worked on the project to New York City to give a detailed briefing on the process of research that produced the report.

The students showed step-by-step how the data were analyzed, how the project was managed, and how they produced the findings. The presentation included personnel from WFP’s American offices and the Rome headquarters, both in person and

201

202

via teleconference. In addition, representatives from the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and other NGOs were present (in person or via teleconference) for lively discussion with the students and faculty about the methodology of the project and how the work done by Auburn students might scale up to allow other NGOs to analyze and evaluate both existing and new data.

Students were responsible for the presentation and were widely complimented, both for their work and for the work’s usefulness to other organizations interested in feeding the hungry.

Participants praised students’ sophistication in undertaking a complex research process and noted their depth of understanding, not only about the process but also about the complexities of food delivery and the unique problems crisis organizations face.

As the report was being finalized, the Auburn research group’s findings were compared to the experience of WFP’s Emergency Response group during a videoconference with the leaders of the WFP project in Rome. Again, the students led the presentation, were able to answer technical questions about the findings, and were pleased to learn that WFP’s evaluation team thought the findings were accurate and represented real issues that WFP either needed to address or that it had addressed during the decade represented by the data. This member-checking is an important part of the qualitative research process; it allows feedback from the individuals or organizations being studied and is used to verify the trustworthiness and credibility of the findings.

Finally, in one of the project’s most exciting developments, WFP headquarters in Rome invited team representatives for a visit. Two students (Sara Rains and Sydney Herndon) as well as faculty, including College of Human Sciences Dean June Henton and Associate Dean Jennifer Kerpelman, traveled to Rome to present the study’s results to an overflow crowd that included more than 80 WFP participants as well as a large contingent from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.

WFP’s African and Asian field offices joined via teleconference.

After the presentation, students and faculty met several times with PREP personnel, focusing on the software, process, and the potential of this kind of evaluation for the agency. Herndon stayed in Rome as a WFP intern after the group returned to the United States, continuing the Hunger Solutions Institute’s long relationship with WFP.

Project Benefits For students, there were multiple benefits.

They were able to apply the theoretical knowledge gained from the Hunger Studies class as well as their training in qualitative methodology to help solve one of the world’s most pressing questions: How can people who experience a disaster be fed most quickly and efficiently? They also got to take the process to New York and Rome and observe the impact of their work—not only the impact on the WFP staff ’s thinking and planning but also on the process of answering this crucial question.

The students learned the rewards associated with doing meaningful work. As Kate Thornton reported, it was possibly the only time in the history of the university that an undergraduate class voted to triple its assigned meeting times. The approach to research, the discipline, and the search for answers to difficult questions by analyzing data

will undoubtedly prove important as the students pursue graduate school or careers.

The project strengthened existing ties between Auburn and the WFP and showed how a university’s human resources—students and faculty—can be focused on a real-world problem. The Hunger Solutions Institute and other Auburn University programs were highlighted before an international community in both New York City and Rome.

Representatives of organizations that actively seek academic expertise and assistance responded positively to student-led presentations, which was rewarding on many levels.

What’s more, the project highlighted Auburn University’s strong commitment to solving the issues of world hunger and addressing these issues on many levels. As emphasized in both presentations, students who did the high-level work involved in the project were not a random group.

This was a select group already deeply immersed in the problems of world hunger because of their hunger minor studies. They understood WFP’s role and why their contribution was important.

What Does the Project Mean?

This pilot project has opened the doors to discussion about how the process could be scaled up for use in other projects, venues, and organizations.

Next steps include the purchase and implementation of the qualitative analysis software used in the project and discussions about how the university can become an ongoing partner for WFP and other NGOs (such as USAID, UNICEF, and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization). An ongoing relationship between WFP and Auburn— a deep learning experience for students and faculty—and the reward of doing real, skilled work at a high level have made this project a model for work at Auburn and the World Food Programme.

The knowledge produced by the students in this project and the process by which it was accomplished will have far-reaching implications for solving the problems of world. Although there is 203 much work still to be done, this project makes an important contribution.

i

n

f

o

c

u

s

Harberts Bring Storied Quail-Hunting Tradition Back to Sedgefields

by Leah Rawls Atkins

204

Sedgefields Plantation, one of Alabamaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most historic quail-hunting preserves, has a long connection with Auburn University and today is owned by an Auburn University trustee and benefactor.

Located north of Union Springs about 42 miles south of Auburn, the plantation was founded in January 1929, when Lewis B. Maytag of Newton, Iowa, from the Maytag washing machine family, purchased his first land in Bullock County. Maytag, called Bud by his friends, hired a plantation manager who began cleaning dead and fallen trees to make the habitat for quail more inviting, planting food for quail, and improving roads on the plantation. Maytag was in such a hurry for his lodge that he constructed a pre-fabricated house that arrived in Union Springs by train. His dog trainer began acquiring the best quail-hunting dogs and good horses. Eventually, Maytag owned

about 14,500 acres. By the 1931 hunting season, everything was ready.

Maytag, who had witnessed his first field trial in 1929 and was not interested, later agreed for the trials to resume on his land. Soon, he was an avid supporter, especially after the National Shooting Dog Championships began in February 1950. For sixteen years, Maytag never missed a major trial at Sedgefields until illness prevented him from attending. The National Shooting Dog Championships grew in prestige and drew state and national media coverage. Hundreds of people attended. For eastern Alabama, from Montgomery to Auburn and Opelika, from Birmingham to Dothan, the Union Springs field trials were the major social scene of the year. State government leaders, political candidates, university presidents and their head football coaches, and college students turned up in Union Springs to ride horses or sit on a wagon to watch the field trials. Each individual tried to keep up with the dogs and witness the points and the coveyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rise. In the evenings they ate barbecue or steak, usually washed down with strong beverages, and danced the night away.

Almost from the beginning of Sedgefields, there was an association with Auburn University. The faculty of the College of Veterinary Medicine was often consulted about the health of Sedgefieldsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

dogs and horses. The horticulture department assisted with the new pecan orchard, and the faculty of wildlife management shared their extensive research on quail food, predators, and reproduction of birds. Particularly helpful was Professor Allen M. Pearson’s studies of quail food and the dangerous predators to quail, from fire ants to hawks to opossum. Support for quail also came from the Alabama Legislature, which had created the Alabama Department of Game and Fish in 1907 and in 1932 authorized the department to begin propagation of quail and other game birds.

The 1950s and ’60s were the Golden Age of Union Springs Field Trials. The town commissioned a bird dog monument and adopted the slogan “Field Trial Capital of the World.” The man who did so much to bring national attention to the trials, Lewis Maytag, died in his Colorado Springs home in 1967.

The ownership of Sedgefields passed to his two sons, who hunted and maintained the land for another ten years. In 1977, a Florida family acquired the plantation. They added commercial agriculture to the land, and although hunting continued, it was not the primary mission of the plantation. Some of the prestigious field trials, such as the National Shooting Dog Championship, went on to be held in other states.

After 20 years, Sedgefields was sold twice.

Eventually it was divided into parcels, which were mostly purchased by Georgia businessmen.

The parcel known as Sedgefields—commonly identified by its nickname of Big Lake—came back on the market in 2008 and was purchased

by Auburn University trustee Raymond Harbert and his wife, Kathryn. Harbert is chairman and CEO of Birmingham’s Harbert Management Corporation, an investment management firm, and Auburn University’s College of Business bears his name. Harbert, a 1982 Auburn alumnus, recently committed $40 million to support the college.

The restoration of the land began slowly with repairing roads, improving drainage, updating the lodge, installing new fencing, and eventually building a new barn and dog kennel. The land was carefully developed to improve the quality of habitat for quail, plenty of quail food was planted, and the numerous predators to the little birds were eliminated as much as possible. Although quail received the most attention, dove and deer were also carefully managed and hunted. Initially, the Harberts did not envision bringing back the old Sedgefields Plantation with its field trial lands, which had been divided and included in several of the parcels sold off earlier.

But as the months passed, the Harberts learned more about the history of the land and became intrigued by the commitment of the field trial participants. They were impressed by their love for and dedication to their dogs. They also came to appreciate the egalitarian nature of the field trials, where urban businessmen drank beer and swapped stories with dog trainers and horsemen from rural areas across the nation. They soon appreciated how important the trials were to the Union Springs community and how difficult it was for field trial officials to obtain permissions from six landowners to run the trials over the acres that had hosted various field trials for maybe a century.

Gradually, perhaps at first not even having 205 a master plan but responding to opportunity, Raymond Harbert began selectively purchasing the old field trial lands that joined his Sedgefields property. And with time, the acres of the 1930s-era Lewis Maytag Sedgefields Plantation lay behind the brown-stained wooden fences of the modern Sedgefields once more. The crowning glory of the Union Springs area, the National Shooting Dog Championships, returned to Sedgefields in 2011.

i

s

s

u

e

s

Deer Lab: Unmatched in Researching White-Tailed Deer Biology and Management

by Stephen S. Ditchkoff and Chad H. Newbolt

206

The white-tailed deer is the most sought-after game species in North America and serves as the foundation for the North American model of wildlife management. The economic revenue generated from activities related to hunting, managing, and simply watching white-tailed deer is unsurpassed by any other species. In fact, white-tailed deer are responsible for over $1 billion in economic revenue in Alabama alone.

Because of the great social and economic importance of these fascinating animals, the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences and Auburn University have made a commitment to ensure a strong white-tailed deer research program at Auburn.

In addition to multiple research projects and emphasis areas in Alabama, South Carolina, and other southeastern states, Auburn University established a 430-acre captive deer research facility

in 2007, known as the Deer Lab, just north of the Auburn campus on the Piedmont Substation in Camp Hill, Alabama. The Deer Lab consists of a naturally maintained landscape surrounded by an eight-foot-tall fence that restricts deer movements into and out of the facility.

The Deer Lab provides Auburn researchers a unique environment to examine aspects of whitetailed deer biology and management that no other research program in the country can address.

Research facilities at other universities typically comprise multiple one- and two-acre pens, and the artificial behavior of deer in small enclosures limits research topics. In contrast, the Deer Lab enables deer to behave in ways that mirror what happens in natural environments, which vastly broadens the scope of possible research objectives.

Another aspect of the Deer Lab that makes the research conducted here special is that researchers have detailed records of each individual deer in the population over long periods of time. This kind of high-resolution information is simply impossible to gather in completely natural environments.

Each year, graduate students, with the assistance of a small army of undergraduate wildlife students striving to gain experience in their chosen field, use night vision-equipped dart guns to capture approximately 75 percent of the population. These

frequent captures enable the research team to monitor body and antler growth and changes in physiological profiles and parasite loads, as well as to conduct condition and health assessments.

In addition, a small genetic sample is taken from each deer during its first capture, and this sample is used to determine the mother and father of each individual deer and ultimately to construct a family tree for the entire population.

The detailed genetic data collected at the Deer Lab is a large part of what makes this research unparalleled and special. Through analysis of the collected genetic information, the team is able to examine factors that influence breeding success or, more simply put, discover which males and females are producing the most fawns and why.

Surprisingly, little is known about this “moststudied” animal when it comes to the important topic of male breeding success. Management decisions on white-tailed deer in the field are often made based upon commonly held assumptions about which males are successful breeders and which are not. However, in reality, almost nothing is known about male breeding success, and managers are actually basing their decisions on fiction, perception, and plain guesses.

To date, Auburn’s Deer Lab has made huge strides on the topic of male breeding success,

including knowledge of how age, antler size, and body size interact to influence how many fawns a buck is likely to sire. In addition, Auburn researchers have documented that the presence of mature males in a population can actually shorten the breeding season and shift it earlier in the year.

These early findings are just the beginning when it comes to what will be discovered about whitetailed deer breeding and behavioral ecology at the Deer Lab. In addition to research on deer-breeding ecology, a multitude of deer-related studies are going on at any one time at the lab. For example, Auburn researchers are currently testing and refining new

and more accurate techniques for estimating deer population size, a critical component of any deer management program. Research is also being conducted on food plots, and studies are looking at the effect of pheromones and other chemicals on deer behavior. Past work at the facility has evaluated the effectiveness of various chemicals to deter deer browsing on ornamental shrubs in neighborhoods.

The construction of Deer Lab has set Auburn University and its deer research program apart from other programs nationwide, and the facility is now the premier white-tailed deer research facility in the country. Perhaps the best news is that the facility is still in its infancy, with considerable room to grow. As the population continues to mature, 207 and researchers are able to collect data from more and more generations of deer, we will be able to answer once-mystifying questions.

Truly, the only limiting factor will be financial resources. Research at Auburn’s Deer Lab is supported almost 100 percent through private donations, and the need for financial support is only going to increase as time goes on. However, this special facility is looking forward to further growth and continuing a tradition of excellence in deer research at Auburn University.

Food for the Future 208

by Keith Cummins

Feeding a Rapidly Growing Population with Fewer Resources

T

he current population of the planet is a bit over seven billion people. Projections are that the population will top nine billion by 2050.

Some projections forecast that the population will level off at 10 billion. Some feel it will be closer to at least 12 billion. This projected leveling off is based on past data, where birth rates fell as economic wellbeing increased.

As people’s economic wellbeing improves, past data also indicate that diet changes. People want, and consume, more animal products. As population increases, demand for meat and dairy will increase worldwide. Meeting this demand with a decreasing resource base, per capita, will be a challenge.

China, as a large, growing Asian country, for example, is out of newly exploitable water reserves.

Yet as Asia’s population experiences increased economic prosperity, its demand for animal products will go up. Animal production requires water. It requires a lot of water.

Estimates of the gallons of water needed to produce one pound of beef range from 441 to 2,500, as published by Time magazine. The number I use in class when I teach dairy production, pretty much standard in the industry, is 250 gallons/cow/day, or 22-23 gallons of water per pound of milk for a cow producing a hundred pounds of milk per day.

To compare, most calculations for plant and vegetable water use are in the 22-25 gallons/ pound range. Meat production, regardless of the estimate you use, requires a lot more water than vegetables or milk.

There are also land constraints. With current techniques and technologies, it requires .36 hectares (.8 acres) or so to grow enough food to feed one person for a year. China—all of Asia—is also out of new arable land. The single largest piece of good, arable land on the planet is the North American continent. This may bode well for the relative power and position of North American countries in the future, even if

technologies change and the land required for food production goes down.

Food Is Chemistry Food production—indeed all biological processes on the planet—is basically just chemistry.

Energy is trapped, and atoms and molecules get rearranged and are used for productive purposes, 209 like running a car, walking to the refrigerator for a snack, or just breathing. It is all the same.

All energy comes from the sun. Energy is trapped by photosynthesis in many different types of plants and microorganisms. Generally, the percentage of the sunlight’s energy trapped is about 1 to 2 percent. This may reach as high as 6 to 7 percent in certain very productive habitats, such as estuaries, where rivers enter the ocean.

The problem is the form in which this energy is trapped. The majority, about 70 percent, is trapped as cellulose. Cellulose is all around us. Cellulose is wood, paper, and a thousand other things. It is just

glucose molecules, sugar. The key is how they are linked together.

That link between the glucose molecules fits the active site of certain microbial enzymes. Humans, and most other animals, can’t digest cellulose. We don’t have the enzymes to break those links, but if the cellulose could be broken down to sugar units, we could metabolize the glucose units just like any other sugar. Indeed, the only difference between the starch in bread and cellulose in wood is how the glucose units are linked together.

To break these bonds and make the cellulose useful to humans, we use animals such as cows, sheep, goats, deer, and other creatures with four 210 stomachs and a symbiotic microbial suite to digest the cellulose. Without cows and other ruminants, life as we know it would be very tough to sustain.

We need cows.

However, the use of cows comes with a cost.

Much of the sun’s energy trapped as cellulose goes into maintaining the cow. In fact, depending on the assumptions you make (average cow, average production, fat content of the milk), as much as 25 percent goes into maintaining the cow. And the gains could be even higher in a non-animal system.

All right, we can accept we need cows and sheep. Let’s just transplant modern agriculture to those parts of the world where it is needed: row

crops, fertilizer, tractors, and large dairy farms— the works.

The problem is that modern agriculture, as practiced in the developed world, needs an incredible amount of infrastructure, both physical and intellectual. Both of those could be transplanted to poorer parts of the world. There are major programs working to do just that. Every student from the developing world studying agriculture at an American university is part of an effort to bring human capital to where it is needed.

However, the further problem is that modern agriculture, as practiced in the developed world, is an enterprise of temperate climates and certain types of soils, both of which are rare in tropical and subtropical parts of the world. The knowledge and physical infrastructure can be developed. The climate and soil are what they are. Changes would have to be made.

Fortunately, changes are being made, slowly, tentatively, but noticeably. And though it may destroy my own personal way of life, it may help my grandchildren have something to eat.

into the next step (RNA), and how RNA is translated into proteins.

The process of modification is important. Based on the number of proteins in the body, we estimated about 100,000 genes. There were only about 30,000. Many are used multiple times, and the product is modified and changed into something else. Nature is very frugal.

However, there was lots of what was labeled as “junk DNA” in between the genes. It wasn’t junk. We have found much of this DNA is turned into regulatory micro-RNA that we are just beginning to understand. But the key is we have the genes. We have the pieces. We have the genes for all the constituent milk proteins, for meat, for all animal products we typically eat. We have the pieces we need.

We don’t need cows anymore. We used cows as bio-reactors, along with their symbiotic microbial suites, to turn grass into milkshakes and hamburgers. (A really neat trick, when you think about it.) Now that we have the pieces, we can do that another way.

Eating Genes

A New Way

The DNA of most useful animals has been sequenced. We know the order of the four types of molecules that make it up. We are learning much about how it is copied, modified, and translated

Imagine a building, a factory. Ground-up trees or other plant material goes in one end. Food comes out the other. It can be milk, cheese, yogurt, or sausage. It can even be ice cream. This is in

reach of modern technology, and could feed a lot of people efficiently and in a sustainable manner.

We know how to do it. First, ground-up plant material, with that cellulose we canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t digest, gets anaerobically fermented in a big stainless steel tank that mimics a cowâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s stomach. We can vary the conditions or the suite of microorganisms there to do the fermentation to alter the products we get out.

Various nutrients will have to be added along with the cellulose, such as minerals and nitrogen.

Nitrogen will increase the cost. Nitrogen fixation from the air using the Haber-Bosch process is energy intensive and very necessary. The natural nitrogen cycle on the planet would provide protein for 1-1.5 billion people.

Out of the fermentation of the ground-up plant material comes several things. We have the microorganisms themselves, which with further processing serve as the amino acid (constituents of proteins) source to make the proteins in milk, cheese, or meat products.

There also will be fermentation products to be turned into fats. Some, like methane, can be burned to heat the fermentation tank. And there will be glucose from partially fermented cellulose to be used in milk sugar, or lactose. It can even be left as glucose for use in products for people who

are lactose intolerant. There would be amino acids for proteins, glucose for milk sugar, and various fermentation products to be made into fats. We would have it all.

After the fermentation, the use of the pieces we have isolated comes into play. The genes for milk or meat proteins can be inserted into yeasts, and proteins expressed. This is the biggest hurdle. Getting the genes inserted, expressed, and secreted into the media around the cell will be the area we must research and develop. Well-understood biochemistry can turn the various fermentation products into fats. The glucose could be isolated and either turned into lactose, again with well-understood biochemistry, or left alone.

We have the pieces. The entire genome of cattle has been sequenced. The genes for the various milk and meat proteins have been identified. Milk protein is very good stuff. Nutritionists use milk proteins as a standard to compare other proteins for use in human nutrition.

Once we have the constituent parts of meat or milk, we could put in products any way we wanted.

We could make cheese, milk, yogurt, butter, or even meat-based products. Meat as we know it will be tougher to make. Meat is organized into muscle fibers, with fats in between (marbling) and in cells.

The fats help make your steak tender. What may

211

be produced is a sausage-like product. More like ground-up beef. Spices and salt can be added to alter flavor.

Milk is both a solution and an emulsion in water—not organized like meat. Milk would be much easier to produce, and it would be easier to alter the final product. Milk components are separated to make various dairy products.

Separation would not be necessary, as the different products would be produced in different processes.

Some efforts in this direction are already underway. Maastricht University in the Netherlands is already making “hamburger” in the lab. They have made a five-ounce burger over a 212 two-week period. It cost $325,000.

The national media has already noticed. NPR ran a piece about Maastricht University’s program.

They raised the obvious questions. First, it costs a lot. However, that cost will come down. The biggest issue is fear. Will people eat it?

Bovine growth hormone use in dairy cattle to increase milk production has largely been discontinued in the United States because of the public backlash over its use. This new process using “pieces of cows”—their genes—is full of new biological processes people will not understand.

There may be public backlash here. Rising food costs and hunger, however, may counter negative public

opinion. This new kind of food may be accepted first in parts of the world with a lower level of economic development.

Some people may see the new way of producing food as a very good thing. People in poor countries where food can be scarce can have access to nutritious food.

Not only can people be fed using the sunlight and energy trapped as cellulose produced locally, but no animals have to be used to feed them. No cows or goats slaughtered. No dairy cows kept and milked several times a day. Some will see this as a great boon.

Of course, this raises other questions. What do we do with cattle when we don’t need cattle any more? Let them die out? I’d rather not do that. I have been raising and managing dairy cattle for over 50 years. I like them. I do not want to see them disappear. And we as a species would be putting all our “eggs in one basket.” We would be casting our lot with technology.

The gains in efficiency and sustainability may counter any objections some people may have.

Feeding 9 or 10 billion people may mean we have to do this. There will be no choice.

The automobile killed the horse-drawn carriage industry, allowing society as we know it to develop.

Digital media is changing the newspaper and book industries daily. Technology progresses. Things

change. Whether the change is for the better can be a matter of perspective. What I have described is doable. Parts of it are already being done.

The new way of producing food would also be very much in the tradition of the land-grant university, including Auburn University. One of the most profound things I learned as an undergraduate student at Washington State University was from a professor of agricultural history, whose name, frankly, I have forgotten. But I never forgot what he taught me. He said, “The land-grant university was created to destroy the family farm.”

The process I describe and speculate upon is in that tradition. Reduce the number of people in farming. Substitute technology. Processes such as I describe, processes that are under development, will do that—and make more food available for more people.

I was raised on a dairy farm. I know dairy cattle like few people in the world. But change is coming, change that builds on what we know.

Change that will bring fuller and healthier lives to many people. With knowledge comes power, and with power comes responsibility. You can view it as a moral imperative. Auburn University must lead in these changes.

We have the pieces. It is time to put them to work. People are hungry.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

W

ithout cows and other ruminants, life as we know it would be very tough to sustain.

213

P

R

OFI

L

E

Azeem Ahmed

From Canned Food Drives to Cairo

by Karen Hunley

214

Azeem Ahmed has been passionate about helping the hungry his whole life, from requesting canned goods for donation at his childhood birthday parties to going to Egypt and famine-plagued Bangladesh for internships that allowed him to address malnutrition firsthand. Now an Auburn University senior and a 2013 Harry S. Truman Scholar, he is scheduled to graduate in May 2014 with a double major in economics and finance— and years of student philanthropy work under his belt. But Ahmed says that his efforts to raise hunger awareness won’t stop when he graduates.

“My hope is that (hunger) is a problem we can solve in our lifetime—my lifetime—and I don’t think that’s asking too much,” he says, emphasizing that there is enough food on earth to feed everyone, but the food is not always accessible to those who need it.

When Ahmed was just 5 years old, his parents took him and his brother, Aleem, to visit a refugee family displaced by the 1999 war in the Yugoslavian region of Kosovo, where tensions between the region’s ethnic Serbs and Albanians had erupted into violence. The family, with whom the Ahmeds connected through friends, was poor and probably didn’t have enough to eat, yet their kids offered the Ahmeds anything they had: a few bananas and some candy. “They had so little, but they wanted to give us so much,” Ahmed remembers. Experiences like this, along with parents who, he says, instilled the importance of helping others, planted the seed that would grow into a passion for fighting hunger locally and even internationally.

Ahmed grew up in Auburn and was homeschooled, which he says gave him the flexibility to interact with different communities and get involved in local hunger relief. Beginning when Ahmed was about 7 years old, he and his brother regularly donated to the Food Bank of East Alabama and even encouraged their friends to enter into a canned food drive with them. They met most of their friends in the Lee County 4-H club, which proved to be a great jumping-off point to begin fighting hunger. The canned food drive caught on within the club and from that point, Ahmed and his brother—also a student at Auburn Univer-

sity—spearheaded the war on hunger within Lee County 4-H. Led by the Ahmed brothers, the 4-H club sponsored a mobile food pantry by raising the funds to pay for all the food and then staffing the food truck as families visited it at the old Lambert Skate Center in Opelika.

“We handed out several thousand pounds of food in about two hours,” Ahmed says. The mobile pantry was provided through the Food Bank of East Alabama and is still operational, setting up periodically at different locations throughout Lee County.

Ahmed remained involved with 4-H and its hunger efforts throughout high school, even working closely with Auburn University’s Committee of 19 while he was a dual-enrolled high school senior taking classes at Auburn. The Committee of 19 is AU’s student-led hunger awareness organization—a group to which Ahmed devoted hours of time each week when he wasn’t in class or studying, once he became a full-time Auburn student in 2009.

He held a number of leadership positions in the Committee of 19 over the first few years, so it’s no surprise he was elected president in 2013.

Ahmed also serves as operations director of Campus Kitchens, yet another project he helped bring to life a few years ago. Campus Kitchens began as a project in a hunger studies class—in which Ahmed was not even enrolled—and after the class ended, one of the students reached out to Ahmed to help her keep Campus Kitchens operational. Campus Kitchens’ mission is to take clean, unused, unspoiled food from AU

215

campus dining venues and safely “repurpose” it into meals for hungry people all over Lee County. Last year, the organization also began a partnership with Greek Life to claim leftover food from fraternity houses.

Currently, the food received as part of Campus Kitchens is already cooked and simply repackaged into individual, nutritionally balanced meals, Ahmed says. The meals are then served at the Auburn United Methodist Church food pantry; His Place, a recovery center for men 18 and older who suffer from addiction; and potentially one or two more locations around the county, depending on demand and food supply. Sev216 eral dozen students work hard to keep Campus Kitchens in service, picking up leftover food and repacking, delivering, and serving it.

“Hunger in Lee County is a huge and growing problem—currently, 1 in 5 people in Lee County go to bed every night hungry or not knowing where their next meal is coming from,” Ahmed says. Campus Kitchens also benefits AU students—as hard as it may be for many other students to believe, hunger is a problem on campus as well, he adds. Ahmed and other student volunteers work with the AU Center for Community Service to provide meals for those students who need food assistance.

In addition to the Committee of 19 and Campus Kitchens, Ahmed has been involved in numerous other campus activities—as vice president of the Honors College, as a student worker in the provost’s office, and as an undergraduate research assistant in the College of Liberal Arts, to name a few. In 2011, he received a fellowship award from OUR CLA—Opportunities in Undergraduate Research in the College of Liberal Arts—which supported his summer internship in Cairo with the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), with which Auburn’s College of Human Sciences has an active partnership. (See related stories in this volume.)

Ahmed’s internship involved helping fortify Egypt’s rice supply, since about 60 million of the country’s 80 million people consume rice on a daily basis. Ahmed worked with a WFP nutrition specialist and local rice expert to develop a way to fortify the rice with vitamins and minerals such as Vitamin A, Vitamin B, and zinc. Then he and the rice expert traveled to about 60 rice mills to convince processors of the nutritional benefits of fortification and to show them how to do it. All the rice mills agreed to the new process, though they had to visit some of the mills an extra time or two.

“Many of them (rice processors) worried about the appearance and shape of the rice—‘would it

look different or taste different?’—but the rice we used, you couldn’t tell it was altered,” Ahmed says. “We had to show them how to fortify the rice, convince them it was safe, and help them do hours of rigorous paperwork to complete the process.”

By the end of the summer, Ahmed had convinced processors to fortify a total of about 250,000 tons of rice. “It was exciting to know that I did help about 15 million people have access to better food—especially as a 19-year-old,” he

says. Witnessing parts of the revolution that took place in Egypt that summer and seeing the Great Pyramids bathed in sunlight every morning on his way to work didn’t hurt the experience either.

He lived just five minutes from Cairo’s Tahir Square (“Freedom” Square) where so many of the revolution protests took place. It was exciting, he says, and only affected him adversely from a traffic standpoint.

While in Egypt, Ahmed also had the opportunity to polish his Arabic, initially learned during two Summer Arabic Intensive courses in Berkeley, California. “I pretty much had to speak Arabic to get around (in Cairo),” he said. He is also fluent in Urdu, his parents’ native language and the main language of Pakistan and India.

In summer 2012, Ahmed took on a very different, more somber internship. He visited Bangladesh and worked with the Center for Diarrheal Research Disease, an international health research organization located in Dhaka, the country’s capital. Since its independence from India in 1972, the south Asian country has been plagued by repeated famine, despite its location on the fertile Ganges delta as the river flows into the Bay of Bengal. The famine of 1973-1974, which claimed the lives of tens of thousands of people after flooding caused the price of rice to soar,

caused not only starvation but significant mortality because of diarrheal diseases like cholera.

Ahmed helped investigate the effects of malnourishment in children, working with pediatric sepsis management, shadowing physicians, and more. He saw that many children were dying from treatable illnesses such as cholera and pneumonia because they simply did not have enough food in their system for the medicine to absorb properly.

“That was my first time actually seeing children that were hungry,” Ahmed remembers. “It really hits home then.”

Ahmed learned about this internship from Doug Coutts, AU’s World Food Programme distinguished visiting professor, who also helped him secure the Cairo internship. “I wanted an experience that was more hands on and medically oriented, and it was a perfect fit,” Ahmed said.

Although the two internship experiences were very different, he says they gave him complementary perspectives on the fight against world hunger.

“Working in Egypt on the fortification project, I knew who it would help, but I may not have come in direct contact with them,” he says. “In Bangladesh, I actually got to see the other end of (hunger) and see why we fortify food.”

The intense dedication to raising hunger awareness and actually getting out and doing something

about it no doubt helped earn Ahmed his Truman Scholarship, one of just 62 in the country in 2013.

He was informed of the good news in April 2013, after a lengthy, rigorous application and interview process. The prestigious title comes with $30,000 for graduate school; a paid internship in Washington, D.C., at any federal agency he chooses; opportunities for employment with the federal government; and access to an impressive network of other Truman Scholars.

After graduation in May, Ahmed plans to take a year to apply to medical schools —he says he wants to become a doctor. Emergency medicine is particularly “fascinating,” he adds, and he’s interested in Doctors Without Borders, a network 217 of doctors and nurses who volunteer their medical services to victims in countries dealing with war or suffering from a natural disaster.

“I have thought I wanted to be a doctor for a long time,” he says. “I knew I wanted to be a doctor after Bangladesh. I really hope that I’ll be able to use my background in business and all the experiences I’ve had to make a huge impact on healthcare issues like hunger both locally and globally.”

Creating New Varieties

by David B. We aver

218

The Importance of Plant Breeding and Varietal Development

O

ur human civilization arose as a result of the development of agriculture, a sophisticated system of domestication, and exploitation of plants. Since agriculture’s beginnings, humankind has been involved in the genetic improvement of plants. From the very beginning, humans selected for propagation those plants that tasted better, were easier to harvest and process into food, produced more, and had predictable germination and growth.

For thousands of years, improvements were slow. Early farmers, through selection and without scientific training, changed maize from a wild grass that was difficult to collect and had hard seeds, low yield, and unpredictable seed germination into the modern crop we know today: high yielding, easy to harvest, and with no seed dormancy so that germination can occur right after planting. Corn can no longer reproduce by itself and has turned that responsibility over to humans, an interesting symbiotic relationship. A similar story can be told

about almost any plant species that has undergone domestication.

A Genetic Revolution As we have learned to apply science and technology to crop improvement, we have been able to speed up the process tremendously. The rediscovery of Mendel’s work in the early 20th century has led to a genetic revolution—crops have been improved for a wide variety of traits related to their usefulness, particularly for yield, quality, and pest resistance.

After the rediscovery of Mendel’s work in 1903, scientists and plant breeders went to work applying his discoveries on the inheritance of traits to the improvement of cotton and many other crops. It took about 30 years from the rediscovery of Mendel’s work to conduct research, apply the knowledge to crop improvement, develop improved varieties, and implement widespread use of these new varieties in farmers’ fields. The result was a positive

yield improvement trend averaging 7.44 pounds of lint increase each year between 1930 and 1995.

Important findings in molecular genetics were made beginning in 1952 with the discovery by Watson and Crick of the structure of DNA, followed by more discoveries in the 1980s that resulted in additional tools and technologies for plant breeders. Other technologies have improved the 219 efficiency of selection by enabling plant breeders to select for specific DNA sequences as opposed to selecting solely based on field performance. Fieldbased tests are very time-consuming and expensive. Through the use of marker-based selection technology, which reduces the need for extensive field-testing, the rate of yield improvement has doubled to 14.0 pounds lint per acre per year.

Similar stories can be told for many of the plants we depend upon for food, fiber, and energy. Not only are we able to produce more corn, cotton, wheat, and other crops per acre, we are able to produce more total crop on fewer acres. This allows

us to conserve land and water resources for future generations.

History of Improving Plant Species Auburn University has had a history of being a part of the improvement of various plant species throughout the years. Varieties of clover, watermelon, tall fescue and other forages, soybean, Southern pea, plum, vetch, pepper, and several other crops have all been developed and released at Auburn. In cotton, a major accomplishment was the development of Auburn 56 cotton, which was widely grown during the mid 20th century and appears in the pedigree of many cotton varieties today.

Since the introduction of transgenic crops and 220 related technologies, most plant breeding related to variety development and release has been taken over by the industry. Today, most work done by public entities focuses on basic genetic studies and the preservation and development of germplasm, also known as genetic resources. “Genetic resources” refers to the entire gene pool for a particular species. Farmers only grow the very best varieties, but there are usually many related types, both cultivated and wild, for any given species.

The development of genetic resources involves two major activities: the collection and preservation of germplasm in “gene banks,” and the evalua-

tion of these materials for valuable traits. Collection and preservation of germplasm resources usually falls under the purview of national governments, as represented by the USDA in our country, or is administered by the United Nations.

As far as evaluation, we have to know what valuable genes are contained in these genetic resources.

To develop these genetic resources, we try to “discover” genes for resistance to pests or other plant stresses by searching through large numbers of exotic, uncultivated, and wild plant types for the genes we need. It is then our job to move these genes into a favorable genetic background, or into plant types suitable for cultivation.

Cotton: A Case in Point One of the major objectives of the cottonbreeding program at Auburn University has been to develop and investigate resistance to reniform nematode. Reniform nematode is a costly pest in cotton that is widely distributed across the Cotton Belt. It is estimated that reniform nematode costs U.S. cotton growers in excess of 200,000 bales per year, with a value of more than $80 million.

Genetic resistance to nematodes eliminates the need to use chemical pesticides that contaminate the environment and is also very economical to the grower and easy to use, since it involves only the

selection of the proper variety. However, developing genetic resistance to reniform nematode has been elusive. Exhaustive searches of the cotton germplasm collection have not found any genotypes within the close relatives of cultivated cotton with high levels of resistance. However, various research groups nationwide have collaborated in finding resistance in wild distant relatives of cotton and have successfully transferred this resistance into upland cotton types that are cross-compatible with Alabama cotton. Two distinct sources of resistance have been developed: the LONREN and BARBREN sources.

Another area of our research focuses on development of heat tolerance in cotton.

Predictions are that we will see an average temperature increase of 0.5 degrees F by the year 2028. Temperatures in excess of 95 degrees F for several days in a row are known to reduce cotton yield and fiber quality, and such conditions are not uncommon in Alabama. Thus, the discovery and utilization of genes that enable plants to tolerate higher temperatures is very important. The best method to measure heat tolerance seems to be planting different cottons in a hot place and see which ones perform best. However, many wild or uncultivated cottons that may have genes for heat tolerance are photoperiodic and will not flower

in Alabama, at least until late in the fall. Thus, the measurement of lint yield as an indicator of heat tolerance is not possible.

Another technique to measure a plant’s physiological response to heat involves measuring the efficiency of chlorophyll in maintaining its activity following exposure to heat stress.

Instruments have been developed that can measure the amount of fluorescence emitted by chlorophyll at any given time. Fluorescence is one of three ways chlorophyll has to dissipate the energy absorbed from light, and it can serve as an indicator of chlorophyll’s ability to function properly. While it can be measured at any time, it is of particular interest during or immediately following exposure to high temperatures.

Beginning in 2006, we began to measure chlorophyll fluorescence response to heat stress in more than 1,700 different upland cotton types in a

stepwise manner. That is, we rapidly screened these cotton types in groups, with the “winners” (those with the best chlorophyll fluorescence values) being selected from each group for further evaluation.

Through this project, we wanted to demonstrate that this trait, chlorophyll fluorescence under heat stress, can be inherited, or passed down from generation to generation. We have made crosses between these heat tolerant types and adapted cotton to find out if this is true. Preliminary studies in the growth chamber have indicated that chlorophyll fluorescence under heat stress is indeed a heritable trait.

Another goal is to determine which plant genes are responsible for the heat tolerance trait by looking at gene expression under both normal and high temperatures. This is done by exposing plants to heat stress, analyzing the RNA (RNA is DNA that has been “transcribed” or is being used to produce a gene product), and seeing how the RNA differs between plants that are heat stressed and those that are not heat stressed.

The third goal is to develop adapted cotton types that have the genes for heat stress. This is achieved through both traditional plant breeding involving crossing and selection among the following generations, and through the use of molecular tools to help us follow the genes through the intervening

generations and make selection more efficient.

Alabama cotton has seen a number of pest problems since cultivation began here in the early 1800s. A new pathogen called target spot arrived on the scene in 2012. This is a leaf disease characterized by lesions that resemble a target.

Although we have limited experience with this disease because it is a new problem, target spot seems problematic during summers of high rainfall.

There is little known about how this disease affects cotton, except for the obvious leaf symptoms.

We are working to gain information about target spot in three main areas. First, we have initiated a field experiment to assess the effects of target spot on yield and fiber quality. We are doing this by 221 inoculating some plots with the disease, with other plots not inoculated. Another series of experiments is aimed at developing a method for evaluation of disease reaction of different cotton types in the greenhouse. This would allow us to evaluate a large number of cotton types, including cultivated and wild types, for disease resistance. Our third goal is to apply this procedure to the many varieties of cotton currently cultivated in Alabama. Using this information, we can inform cotton growers which varieties would be best if they are having problems with the disease. This type of work can be immediately useful to cotton producers.

By Jacqueline Kochak

222

Good Meat or Bad?

Determining Spoilage with Nanostructured Sensors

I

magine going to the grocery store and picking up a package of meat or fish. Then you notice that a label inside the food package reads do not eat in blue-tinted letters. You put the product back because the fish is spoiling, and the “smart paper” told you so. Spoiling chicken, meat, or fish emits ammonia, a compound of hydrogen and nitrogen, and tiny gas sensors embedded in the paper detected the nitrogen, changing the color of the writing on the paper’s label.

This innovation isn’t yet in grocery stores, but Marko Hakovirta hopes it won’t be long. Hakovirta, a chemical engineering professor, is director of the Alabama Center for Paper and Bioresource Engineering (AC-PABE), which has developed a way to coat the surface of paper and paper-related materials with a “nanostructured sensor element.”

To understand what that means, you first have to understand that a nanostructure is something measured in nanometers—and a nanometer is a billionth of a meter.

The tiny sensor elements are embedded in “natural self-assembled silica nanostructures,” meaning diatomaceous earth, or DE. Diatomaceous earth consists of the fossilized remains of single-celled diatoms, a kind of hard-shelled algae. When the algae dies, the silica shells drop to the ocean floor and over millions of years build up in vast deposits that can be mined.

Because of the hollow silica shells’ amazing diversity in size and shape, DE coated on paper offers an enormous surface area to provide a platform where whatever is used as a chemical sensor can be immobilized or attached. The pocked surface consists of thousands of extremely small channels that act like filters, with the gas to be detected wafting through nano-, meso-, and micro-pores that have been coated with the sensor dye.

“DE offers a humongous surface area and a great morphology for this application,” Hakovirta says.

“The sensors are anchored onto the particles, and

the gas from spoiling food goes through all these big and small holes.”

Diatomaceous earth has been used in everything from insecticides to livestock feed. One of DE’s time-honored uses is in toothpaste, Hakovirta notes, so there are no worries about accidentally consuming the substance.

“There is always a dispute about how safe some 223 of the nanoparticles are,” he says. “For example, people thought asbestos was safe. But this has a 100-year history at least, and pharmacists even put diatomaceous earth in medications.”

“Nanomaterials can cost thousands of dollars a pound,” Hakovirta says. “This is ‘nature made,’ and costs less than $1 a pound. To integrate into food packaging, the cost needs to be very low.”

In the past, diatomaceous earth has been used as filler in paper manufacturing, and because of its high porosity as a filter medium in swimming pools. Nobody had looked at using DE in this kind of coating application, however, utilizing its

properties to provide a platform for giving paper packaging new and useful properties.

Hakovirta recognized DE’s potential as a way to add value to paper products because of his unusual background. He trained as a nuclear physicist in his native Finland, and then earned a doctorate in materials science and plasma physics. As a materials engineer at the University of Helsinki he studied diamond coatings, then he moved to Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico as a postdoctoral fellow to continue his studies of superhard and advanced materials. Next came a stint at the famed CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, where Hakovirta partici224 pated in the research and engineering of the new 27-kilometer-long Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator used to study the elusive Higgs boson particle—also known as the “god” particle—whose existence wasn’t confirmed until last year.

From CERN, Hakovirta returned to Helsinki, where he spent ten years at Metso Corp., a global engineering and technology corporation serving customers in many manufacturing industries including pulp and paper. During his last five years there, he was chief technology officer and vice president of technology, environment, and quality, overseeing some $150 million in annual investments in research and development.

“I was a corporate guy with many hats, and I was exposed to all kinds of technology,” Hakovirta says.

“The move might seem surprising, but Metso was a supplier to CERN, and physicists are known to be very systematic. We process and simplify very complex information in a very systematic way, skills that are useful in looking at corporate-wide technology strategies and innovation.”

As director of AC-PABE since 2012, Hakovirta networks with companies, finds faculty members to carry out research, and runs the pulp and paper education program for some 60 students from chemical, mechanical, and electrical engineering. Since the 1980s, the center has provided undergraduate, graduate, and continuing education relevant to the needs of the pulp, paper, and bioresource industries, conducted research in line with the industry’s research agenda, developed and transferred technology to the industry, and provided timely technical information to the operating sector of the industry.

AC-PABE is backed by the Auburn Pulp and Paper Foundation with some 40 companies as members, including big names like Georgia Pacific and International Paper. In his new position, Hakovirta has been able to use both his imagination and his background in materials science and the pulp and paper industry. AC-PABE’s mission is to help

the industry—which faces global competition and pressure on production costs—to create solutions aligned to its needs and scalable to large-scale industrial manufacturing processes.

A Platform Technology Hakovirta says others have shown the efficacy of using enzyme immobilization in silica structures, but to his knowledge using diatomaceous earth for this application is potentially groundbreaking because of DE’s versatility, ease of use, cost, and sensitivity.

Because this is a “platform technology,” detecting spoilage is just one possible application. In plain English, a platform technology is a technology upon which other products and processes can be built, and the center is investigating several other applications in addition to spoilage detection.

“This is just the beginning of the research on this topic, and AC-PABE is looking at more advanced applications,” Hakovirta says. “For example, by immobilizing certain enzymes and salts one can create bioassays that detect bacteria or neurotoxins in pesticides and for use in national security applications.”

AC-PABE has demonstrated that the nanosensor substrate can be applied successfully to paper using industry-recognized bench-scale coating

techniques. Instead of using a polymer-based coating, the center is looking at using nanofibrillated cellulose created using a microfluidizer, which breaks cellulose fibers into very small fractions measured in nanometers. This material can then be used to produce coatings or nanopaper.

“It is extremely strong, stronger than plastic, and enables us to make barrier coatings and packaging that can actually block gases,” Hakovirta says.

With the microfluidizer, the center also makes nanopaper that is so strong it might possibly be used as skin for aerial vehicles.

The center’s research plan calls for exploring the application of nanosensors to detect bacteria and neurotoxins on tissue paper, nonwoven materials, filter substrates, and other materials. The process for identifying bacterial contamination is exactly the same as for detecting spoilage, but the embedded reagents are bioassays. Again, the paper changes color, a change that is easy to detect by the untrained eye. For example, the bacteria E. coli produces an enzyme called β-glucuronidase, or GUS. XG salt is embedded into the nanostructure, and the color blue results when GUS is hydrolyzed in the presence of the salt.

“We didn’t invent the GUS assay—others did—but we want to use the bioassay for new applications,” Hakovirta says. “For example, we could

design a wipe with embedded particulates, and when you swiped a surface you could tell if bacteria were present. Or we could embed particulates into the ‘diaper’ in a meat package.”

The challenge is that no bioassay is universal, capable of detecting every kind of bacterial contamination. Hakovirta says, however, that a matrix with different assays could be embedded into packaging, providing notice of contamination by several different pathogens. The center utilizes an ultra-sophisticated ink jet printer to print enzymes onto the sensing papers in different patterns.

The center also has a patent application for a felt pen that, when swiped across a surface, can detect pesticides. This could be useful for customs agents charged with protecting imports into this country.

The process uses an assay called Ellman’s reagent and an enzyme called acetylcholinesterase (AChE) embedded in the silica nanostructures created by the diatomaceous earth. AChE is necessary for the breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, one of the organic molecules that make our nervous systems work. A chemical reaction caused by Ellman’s reagent and AChE causes the nanosensor to turn yellow—if no neurotoxin is present.

If a neurotoxin is present, the AChE activity is suppressed, and the breakdown of AChE that is necessary for the nervous system to function does

not occur. These AChE inhibitors are often found in insecticides, as well as in snake venom and nerve gas. The process is a little more complicated because some of the reagents must be kept separate from the nanosensor until the substance in question is ready to be tested. The absence of the color yellow on the nanosensor is the tip-off that a neurotoxin is present.

“There is also a color change, but only when a neurotoxin is not involved,” Hakovirta says. “A customs agent takes this pen, punctures the ampule, and chemicals are released into the felt pen.

He then swipes the pen over a surface suspected to have neurotoxin, and the felt changes color to yellow if there is no neurotoxin present.”

225 The center has successfully tested the nanosensors’ food spoilage applications in the lab, with current work at TRL-3. That means “Technology Readiness Level 3,” on a scale that runs from 1 to 9. TRL 3 indicates that the application is ready to be integrated into a larger system for further testing in increasingly realistic environments and that a patent application has been filed.

Comprehensive Utilization of Microalgae 226

B y Yif e n Wa ng a n d Douglas White

Functional Food and Biofuel

T

he USDAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) has established five areas of societal challenges that will be areas of priority for the next five years: global food security and hunger, climate change, sustainable energy, childhood obesity, and food safety. We are currently conducting a project that lies in the priority areas of both childhood obesity and sustainable energy.

Alabama has perennially been among the states with the highest incidence of obesity and has been the state with the most diagnosed cases of diabetes per capita. There is a high probability that an obese child will be obese as an adult (Whitaker et al.

1997). To reverse the obesity trend in the U.S., and decrease the incidence of its associated health complications, it is appropriate to attack the problem when it beginsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;often in childhood.

Dried hijiki, an edible brown algae that contains fucoxanthin.

Functional foods, or foods that have healthpromoting or disease-preventing properties, may be one way to address this issue. In this regard, fucoxanthin could be considered a functional food that has been suggested to have anti-obesity properties (Maeda et al. 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009; Woo et al. 2009; Matsumoto et al. 2009). Fucoxanthin is an epoxy carotenoid with some important bioactivities. Unlike some of the other carotenoids, fucoxanthin is not a precursor of vitamin A. It is a major carotenoid biosynthesized in brown algae and several other algal classes (e.g., Bacillariophyceae). Fucoxanthin, together with chlorophyll a, can bond to proteins to assemble fucox-Chl a-protein complexes in thylakoid and act as a light harvesting and transferring pigment. Several edible species of brown algae, including kombu (Laminaria japonica), wakame (Undaria pinnatifida), and hijiki (Sargassam fusiforme), are rich in fucoxanthin and consumed as delicacies across Southeast Asian countries, China, Japan, Korea, and a few European

countries. Since fucoxanthin has been proposed to exert some amazing health benefits in recent metabolic and nutritional studies, it is attracting more and more attention from researchers in food science, food engineering, and human nutrition.

However, fucoxanthin content in natural material is low, even in those algae species that are considered to be rich in it. The fucoxanthin 227 contents are only around 18 and 12 mg per 100 g fresh in Padina tetrastromatica and Laminaria japonica rhizoid, respectively. Therefore, enrichment of fucoxanthin is necessary before it can be used as a functional food or medicine. Extraction is the most used enrichment method for fucoxanthin.

Researchers have typically used a polar organic solvent (or solvent combinations) to extract fucoxanthin from raw materials. Then the extract was redistributed in a nonpolar organic solvent/water two-phase system. Fucoxanthin would go into the organic solvent phase, while the polar fraction of the extract would stay in the water phase and be

removed. Next, a stepwise elution with a silica gel column was carried out for further purification (Maeda et al. 2005, Maeda et al. 2009, Woo et al.

2009). A suitable extraction procedure is the key to obtain high-quality, low-cost fucoxanthin.

As functional foods, carotenoids, including fucoxanthin and lutein, have been shown to have anti-obesity, anti-diabetic, anti-angiogenesis, and anti-cancer properties. However, carotenoids are easily oxidized and/or degraded when exposed to the environment. Microencapsulation is a potential novel technology to solve this problem. This technology is the packaging of small particles, also known as the core or actives, within a secondary 228 material, also known as the shell, to form small capsules. The core of the capsule is isolated from the surrounding environment and is released in response to a trigger such as shear, pH, temperature, oxygen, or enzyme action, thus enabling its controlled and timed delivery to a targeted site.

Encapsulation technology has been widely applied in the medical, pharmaceutical, cosmetics, chemical, agricultural, and food industries.

Proposed Benefits of Fucoxanthin The proposed benefits of this multi-functional compound include the following:

Anti-obesity effect

The anti-obesity effect of fucoxanthin has been proposed by several researchers (Maeda et al. 2007, Maeda et al. 2009, Woo et al. 2009).

Fucoxanthin inhibits intracellular lipid accumulation during adipocyte differentiation of 3T3-L1 cells (Maeda et al. 2006). Furthermore, fucoxanthin feeding has been reported to suppress the development of white adipose tissue (WAT) in diet-induced obese mice. Fucoxanthin has been suggested to increase the expression of uncoupling protein 1 (UCP1) in WAT (Maeda et al. 2005, Maeda et al. 2009). UPC1 is not normally expressed in WAT. In brown adipose tissue, UCP1 is thought to uncouple oxidative phosphorylation, resulting in increased heat production. Theoretically, this could increase energy expenditure and, thus, decrease body fat.

Another study has suggested that fucoxanthin can decrease the activity of pancreatic lipase, resulting in decreased absorption of dietary fats (Matsumoto et al. 2009).

Anti-diabetic effect

As of 2000, at least 171 million people worldwide suffer from diabetes, or 2.8 percent of the population (Wild et al. 2004). According to the American Diabetes Association, 7 percent

of the adult U.S. population is diabetic, while the estimate for diabetes in Alabama alone is 10 percent of the population. Maeda and co-workers (2007, 2009) have reported that dietary fucoxanthin has significant anti-diabetes effects in mouse models. Fucoxanthin feeding decreased blood glucose and plasma insulin levels, and it promoted glucose transporter 4 (GLUT4) mRNA expression in skeletal muscle tissues. Furthermore, dietary fucoxanthin could regulate adipocytokine secretion, thus preventing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.

Anti-angiogenesis effect

Angiogenesis is the process of new blood vessel growth, which is involved in many physiological and pathological situations, like cancer development. The anti-angiogenic effects of fucoxanthin and a deacetylated product, fucoxanthinol, have been reported by Sugawara and co-workers (2006). They found fucoxanthin could significantly suppress human umbilical vein endothelial cell (HUVEC) proliferation and tube formation, and could suppress differentiation of endothelial progenitor cells into endothelial cells involving new blood vessel formation. These results indicated that fucoxanthin might be useful in preventing angiogenesis-related diseases.

Anti-cancer effect

Fucoxanthin is a widely recognized anticancer carotenoid. It has been reported that fucoxanthin could cause growth inhibition of human neuroblastoma GOTO cells (Nishino et al.

1992) and human leukemia cells (Hosokawa et al. 1999), and significantly reduce viability of human prostate and colon cancer cells (KotakeNara et al. 2001, Hosokawa et al. 2004).

The metabolic fate of dietary fucoxanthin in mammals has also been investigated. It has been reported that fucoxanthin is hydrolyzed to fucoxanthinol during absorption by Caco-2 human intestinal cells (Sugawara et al. 2002). In another work, fucoxanthinol and amarouciaxanthin were determined to be the primary metabolites of fucoxanthin in rats. Moreover, other metabolites, which were further deacetylated, hydrolyzed, and/or demethylated, were also detected with an LC-MS system. Based on the results, possible metabolic pathways for fucoxanthin in rats were proposed (Sangeetha et al. 2010).

These works may help to explain the biological functions of fucoxanthin.

The specific objectives will be carried out as follows: a) first, determine the optimum perimeters of extraction of fucoxanthin, including

ratio of extractant to raw material, extraction time, and temperature, then separate, purify, and identify fucoxanthin from algae; and b) use this product to determine the effect of the extracted fucoxanthin, administered daily, on the energy balance of rats fed a high-fat diet.

Fucoxanthin extraction The following steps are involved in extracting fucoxanthin from algae:

and temperature are probably the three most important factors affecting extraction efficiency.

Optimized combination of the three parameters is a key to a successful extraction process. In this project, weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll try to establish a procedure to search for the optimized parameter combination under different conditions (different raw materials, different extractant, etc.)

2. Selection of extractant. Many kinds of low boiling point organic solvents can be used to extract fucoxanthin from the raw material. In some previous works, a high toxic and expensive solvent such as chloroform was employed (Maeda et al.

2005). In order to establish a safe and feasible extraction process, low-toxic and low-cost solvents (e.g. methanol, ethanol, and acetone) and combinations of these will be investigated in this project. Their extraction efficiencies and economic feasibilities will be compared to determine the best option.

Response surface methodology (RSM) is a powerful mathematical and statistical technique for designing experiments, building models, and evaluating effects of independent variables (Box and Draper 1987, Montgomery 1997).

It can help researchers get results in interested 229 parameter ranges with fewer experiments.

Moreover, different from traditional experiment design, RSM considers not only the effect of a single factor but also the interactions between the factors. The interactions, if any, can be easily observed based on the resulting regression equation. In this project, RSM will be employed to find the optimized parameter combinations of extractant/raw material ratio and extraction time and temperature under different conditions.

3. Optimization of extraction condition. The ratio of extractant to raw material, extraction time,

Radio frequency (RF) heating is a promising dielectric heating technology. The heating

1. Selection of raw material. Thalassiosira weissflogii, a kind of microalgae, rich in fucoxanthin, will be selected as the raw material for the extraction.

is achieved by direct interaction between an electromagnetic field and dipole molecules and/or ion pairs in heating objects (Wang et al.

2003). Heat is generated as the electromagnetic field reverses the polarization of individual molecules, or causes migration of ions as the electromagnetic field alternates at high frequency range of 10 to 300 MHz. In RF heating, only ions/dipole molecules directly absorb the energy from the electromagnetic field (Barker 1983). Our previous work indicated that this selective heating may benefit a number of physical and chemical processes, including extraction of triterpenes/triterpenoids and polysaccharides from Lingzhi mushrooms (Ganoderma lucidum) and stems of shiitake mushroom, respectively, and transesterification of waste cooking oil into biodiesel. In this project, RF heating will be introduced in the extraction process to evaluate whether it has some accelerating effects.

230

The edible seawood known as kombu is actually a brown algae that contains fucoxanthin, which is being researched for its healthy properties.

4. Redistribution of the extract. This is a preliminary step of purification. A nonpolar organic solvent/ water two-phase system will be used to redistribute the extract. Fucoxanthin will go into the organic solvent phase while the polar impurities in the extract will stay in the water phase and be removed. A suitable solvent and solvent/water

ratio will help achieve high-efficiency, low-cost purification. Organic solvents (e.g. ethyl acetate and ethyl ester) and their combinations will be investigated in this project.

5. Purification. A stepwise elution with a silica gel column will be carried out to further purify extracted fucoxanthin. The elution solvent typically consists of a non-polar solvent (e.g. hexane and petroleum) and a weak polar solvent (e.g. ethyl acetate). The elution solvent combinations and the elution procedure, which will significantly affect the purification product, will be optimized in this project.

6. Analysis. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), equipped with a C-18 column and a UV-Vis detector, will be employed to quantitatively analyze fucoxanthin. Detection conditions will be investigated and optimized.

In addition, the possibility of establishing a quick detection method using a UV-Vis spectrophotometer will be explored.

Our Study To extend the earlier findings that fucoxanthin can decrease body fat, we will perform an energy balance study. We previously performed a similar study looking at the effects of low dietary protein

on energy balance (Du et al. 2000). Thirty-eight male Wistar rats (approximately 150 g) will be housed individually in hanging wire mesh cages in an environmentally controlled room.

Initially, rats will be given free access to chow diet and water. Prior to treatment, eight rats will be killed to serve as baseline controls for the body composition analysis. The remaining 30 rats will be divided into three groups of 10 rats. Two of the groups will be fed a high-fat, high-sucrose diet (50 percent fat, 30 percent carbohydrate, 20 percent protein, by calories). The remaining group will be fed a low-fat control diet (10 percent fat, 70 percent carbohydrate, 20 percent protein, by calories). One of the high-fat-fed groups will receive a daily treatment of fucoxanthin via gastric gavage (force-feeding). The other two groups will receive daily gastric gavage of the vehicle, or the plain liquid that carries the treatment.. Body weights and food intake (corrected for spillage) of each rat will be recorded daily throughout the study. Feces will be collected periodically and assessed for fat content. Insulin tolerance tests will be performed after the rats have been on the diets for 4 and 8 weeks to determine whether signs of type 2 diabetes are developing. After 8 weeks, the rats will be killed and the bodies collected for body composition analysis.

Rat carcasses will be autoclaved in beakers covered with foil for one hour at 120° C. They will then be blended with 3 ml of distilled water/ gram body weight and this mixture homogenized with a tissue homogenator. Two sets of samples will be taken in triplicate. One set will be used to determine the percentages of body water and ash. These samples will be dried in an oven for two days at 85°C to determine body water and then ashed in a muffle oven at 600°C overnight to determine body ash. The other set of samples will be used to determine the percentage of body fat by chloroform/methanol extraction. The percentage of protein will be calculated by the difference. Total body fat, protein, water, and ash will be determined by multiplying the ratio of each component by the carcass weight. To calculate carcass energy and energy intake, the energy content of protein is assumed to be four calories/gm and the energy content of fat to be nine calories/gm. From the baseline control rats, the relationship between carcass components and body weight at the beginning of the study will be determined. Using these relationships and the experimental animals’ body weight before the administration of fucoxanthin, the initial carcass composition of each rat will be estimated.

From the difference between the determined

final carcass composition and the estimated initial carcass composition, the gain in body fat, protein gain, energy gain, energy efficiency, and energy expenditure will be estimated and compared between the fucoxanthin-treated group and the control group.

Another Potential Benefit The trend in increasing energy consumption is expected to continue as the world population increases, which will put enormous pressure on global warming, depletion of fossil fuels, and the price of petroleum-based fuels. These real concerns force us to search for alternative, sustainable, renewable, efficient, and cost-effective energy 231 sources, such as wind, solar, hydro, or biomass energy, which produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions (Nigam and Singh 2010).

Biofuel is a renewable energy source that helps reduce the adverse effects of the frequent oil supply crisis and could serve as a long-term replacement of fossil fuels, helping non-fossil-fuel-producing countries reduce energy dependence. Two of the most common and successful biofuels are biodiesel and bioethanol, which mainly replace conventional liquid fuels like diesel and petrol. Bioethanol is an alcohol produced by fermentation, mostly from carbohydrates produced in sugar or starch crops

such as corn or sugarcane. Cellulosic biomass, derived from non-food sources such as trees and grasses, is also being developed as a feedstock for ethanol production. Although dedicating more crops to ethanol production can address the environmental issues, it has raised concerns about devastating effects on food availability and security around the world. Thus, there is an urgent demand for alternative, sustainable fuels and feedstocks to replace food-based feedstocks.

Algae, also know as “third generation biofuels” (Rojan et al. 2011), are gaining more and more attention as sustainable, renewable, efficient, and costeffective energy sources of biomass for production 232 of bioethanol. Algae have higher photon conversion efficiency and can synthesize and accumulate large quantities of carbohydrate biomass for bioethanol production from inexpensive raw materials. Generally, algae can be classified as either microalgae or macroalgae, based on morphology and size. As the name indicates, macroalgae—for example, giant kelp—are typically composed of multicellular cells that organize into structures resembling roots, stems, and leaves of higher plants (Chen et al.

2009). On the other hand, microalgae are microscopic organisms, many of which are unicellular.

Microalgae in particular are being studied for bioethanol production. It has been suggested that

green algae, including Spirogyra species and Chlorococum sp., can accumulate high levels of polysaccharides from their complex cell walls as well as starch. This kind of starch accumulation can be used in bioethanol production (Harun et al. 2010, Eshaq et al. 2011). Microalgae can be used for production of both lipid-based biofuels and for ethanol biofuels from the same biomass as a means to increase their overall economic value.

In this research we will compare two different raw materials—original microalgae and the byproducts of microalgae after fucoxanthin extraction—using four different pretreatment methods: acid, alkaline, radio frequency assisted with acid, and radio frequency assisted with alkaline. We can divide the process of bioethanol production into four stages: preparation of microalgal biomass, pretreatment of microalgal biomass, preparation of yeast, and fermentation. We will then study the bioethanol concentration, glucose concentration, and microscopic analysis to confirm cell rupturing, and then compare these results.

1) Preparation of microalgal biomass.

Frozen samples of microalgae are allowed to defrost and the (liquid that is left after processing) decanted. The remaining microalgae sludge is centrifuged. The centrifugation is performed

repeatedly by resuspending the wet biomass with fresh de-ionised water in order to remove residual medium salts from the microalgae.

The resulting biomass is oven-dried, and the microalgal biomass is then milled, achieving a fine powder.

2) Pretreatment of microalgal biomass a. Acid pretreatmen distilled water to form different solid/liquid ratios, mixed with sulphuric acid, and incubated in an oven. After a specific pretreatment time, the samples are cooled to room temperature, and the liquid containing the released sugars is separated from the microalgae pellet by centrifugation. The liquid is adjusted to pH 7 using 1M NaOH solution and is sterilized in an autoclave prior to fermentation. b. Alkaline pretreatment. Microalgae powder is measured into a glass jar, and de-ionised water is added. A NaOH solution is prepared, added to the microalgae mixture, and stirred. The mixture is placed in an oven and incubated at a specific temperature for a specific period of time. The jar is removed from the oven, cooled to room temperature, and the content centrifuged. The supernatant is separated and stored prior to fermentation.

c. Radio frequency heating. The radio frequency pretreatment is carried out using a pilotscale radio frequency heater system with an operating frequency of certain MHz. As shown in Figure 1, treatment is performed inside the chamber, which has electrically insulated walls.

The radio frequency energy is generated via a pair of parallel rectangular plate electrodes; the lower plate applicator is mounted at a fixed position, while the upper one is adjustable.

Before treatment, the micoralgal biomass is soaked in acid or alkaline solutions at room temperature for a specific time period.

3) Preparation of yeast. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is used as yeast in this experiment. The yeast is cultured in Luria Broth (LB) medium. Yeast cells are harvested by centrifugation. The supernatant is discarded, and the cells are washed with phosphoric acid (1 percent, v/v). The washing and centrifuging are repeated three times to remove the residual sugars in the medium. The yeast inoculum level for anaerobic fermentation is based on the volume of the microalgae sugarcontaining medium and not the LB medium, which is just used to establish the yeast culture.

4) Fermentation. Microalgal supernatant from the pretreatment step is defrosted, transferred into conical flasks, and autoclaved, and yeast culture is transferred aseptically into each of the flasks. A non-returning stem and valve attachment are fitted to each flask. Nitrogen gas is sparged through the flasks to remove dissolved oxygen molecules in order to direct the metabolic pathway to the anaerobic regime. The flasks are placed in an incubator. A sample is taken every eight hours from each flask for analytical monitoring.

Conclusion Fig. 1. Radio frequency heating system.

Extracting fucoxanthin from the microalgae Thalassiosira weissflogii to develop a kind of

functional food could be of great significance for addressing the nationwide obesity epidemic.

Additionally, the byproducts can be used to make bioethanol. Therefore, we believe this project brings a synergistic effect to both the USDA NIFA priority areas of childhood obesity and sustainable energy.

233

234

The Promise of Probiotics B y I ry na S o ro ku l ova

Auburn Lab Seeks to Combat Foodborne Infections

F

oodborne pathogens pose a significant threat to our health. The Centers for Disease Control estimates that each year roughly one in six Americans (some 48 million people) gets sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases.

Since foodborne infections have such a dramatic impact on morbidity and mortality, particularly of infants and children, new approaches for costeffective and easy-to-deliver prophylaxis and treatment are highly desirable.

Probiotics—harmless bacteria that protect the body from harmful bacteria—show promise as a way to combat foodborne infections.

Probiotic prophylaxes and therapies are gaining wider acceptance as more scientific data emerge regarding both the interaction between pathogen and beneficial microbes in the human intestinal tract and the molecular mechanisms of probiotics’ action. Probiotic bacteria, which have a beneficial effect for the host and have pronounced

antagonistic activity against these pathogens, are expected to be a clear alternative in the prevention and treatment of foodborne infections.

In particular, bacteria of the Bacillus genus— among the most widespread microorganisms in nature—possess great potential as probiotic cultures. Humans have always been in contact with these bacteria, as evidenced by bacilli in samples of permafrost soil, as old as 100,000 years; isolation of Bacillus spp. from Dominican amber, which is 25

to 40 million years old; and the discovery of spores in 250-million-year-old salt crystals.

Bacillus spp. are predominant in soil and also have been frequently isolated from water and air.

Being ubiquitous in soil, air, and water, they easily find their way into food products such as wheat, grain, whole meal, milk, and soya beans. So bacilli in large amounts (107 -108 CFU) consistently 235 enter the gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts of healthy people, and many authors believe that Bacillus is a normal component of human intestinal microflora.

Various probiotic effects are reported for Bacillus spp. For example, bacilli produce more than 200 antibiotics that differ in their structure as well as spectrum of activity. Bacilli also produce various enzymes, including digestive and lytic enzymes, as well as essential amino acids and vitamins. Some Bacillus strains decrease serum cholesterol levels, and bacilli show antimutagenic effects as well as stimulating non-specific

236

immunoreactivity of microorganisms. They also protect intestinal cells against oxidant-mediated tissue damage and loss of barrier function. Clearly, Bacillus shows promise.

In my lab, we have isolated a Bacillus subtilis strain with a unique spectrum of antagonistic activity. This strain has been highly effective against pathogenic microorganisms (S. aureus, Candida

albicans, S. typhimurium, S. sonnei, S. flexneri) and did not affect the microorganisms of the normal gut microbiota. The isolated B. subtilis strain inhibited growth of all tested multi-resistant strains of S. aureus, including MRSA, Campylobacter ssp., and Salmonella spp. In fact, 80 to 100 percent of tested pathogens isolated from patients were sensitive to our Bacillus subtilis strain, demonstrating that this

strain is much more effective than other Bacillus strains used as probiotics.

We found that this probiotic strain produces amicoumacin (an antibiotic with anti-inflammatory properties) with the original spectrum of activity. Amicoumacin demonstrated high efficacy against pathogenic bacteria and no effect on the microorganisms that are a component of normal microflora, so we can speculate that the antagonistic activity of the B. subtilis probiotic strain is partly due to antibiotic production.

In animal models of intestinal infections, oral treatment with this probiotic strain protected 63 to 97 percent of mice. The high efficacy of the B. subtilis probiotic strain was also shown in clinical trials. Patients with acute enteric infections were treated with only the probiotic for 10 days.

Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were completely eliminated in all these patients.

Probiotic bacteria, as opposed to antibiotics, do not drive the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in pathogens. In addition, probiotic bacteria eliminate pathogenic bacteria from the intestine without depressing normal microflora, and they increase nonspecific immunoreactivity of the host. Thus, the Bacillus probiotic can be a valuable alternative to antibiotics in the prevention and treatment of foodborne infections.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

237

P

robiotic bacteria have a beneficial effect for the host and have pronounced antagonistic activity against pathogens. They may be a clear alternative in the prevention and treatment of foodborne infections.

i

n

f

o

c

u

s

Detection and Food Safety Center: A Case in Point

by Bryan Chin and Karen Hunley

238

The Auburn University Detection and Food Safety Center (AUDFS) is composed of approximately 25 faculty members from 18 departments and four colleges on the Auburn University campus. The goal of these researchers is to improve the safety of the U.S. food system by developing the science and engineering required to rapidly identify, pinpoint, and characterize problems that arise in the food supply chain through the integration of sensor and information systems technology.

AUDFS has filed more than 145 invention disclosures, has been awarded 29 patents, and has commercialized eight products. One of these products is a test kit for the presence of meat and bone meal from other ruminants that is contaminating livestock feed. Cattle are normally herbivores, and consuming feed contaminated with the remains of other ruminants (such as cattle and sheep) is the only known source of mad cow Graduate student Yating Chai works with faculty in the Department of Materials Engineering.

disease transmission. Another product is a test kit that identifies meat species, which is useful for tasks such as detecting horse meat in ground beef.

Other commercial products that have come out of AUDFS research include an ultra-high-resolution microscope for the observation of living bacteria, a passive oil recovery system, and portable sensor equipment for sampling air contaminants. These products are being produced commercially by Neogen, ELISA Technologies, CytoViva, and RedXDefense, Inc. To date, AUDFS researchers have jointly graduated 69 masters and 85 doctoral students, providing the food industry with much-needed interdisciplinary, scientific/engineering manpower.

AUDFS has spun off one commercial company (Aetos) and one additional Auburn University Center of Excellence, the Federal Aviation Administration Center for Airliner Cabin Environmental Research. AUDFS faculty members have published more than 440 articles in refereed scientific journals supporting improved food safety.

A Case in Point: Hand-Held Sensors People may soon be able to test for contaminated food right in their own kitchens, says Yating Chai, a doctoral student in materials engineering at AUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Center for Detection and Food Safety. A

recently developed handheld wireless device makes it much easier to test for bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella, sounding an alarm if these or other pathogens lurk in your food.

In contrast, traditional bacteriological testing requires a great deal of expertise and consumes a lot of energy, Chai says. It can also take several hours—giving bacteria ample time to proliferate in the food supply and make thousands sick. Quick detection of rapidly spreading pathogens is key to preventing foodborne illnesses.

“This new discovery will enable tests to be conducted in agricultural fields or at processing plants in real-time, enabling both the foods and processing plant equipment and surfaces to be checked for contamination,” she says.

Chai has been working on the device with her colleagues in the Department of Materials Engineering—Dr. Bryan Chin, Dr. Shin Horikawa, Dr. Howard C. Wikle, and Steve Best.

The new device is made up of a very small sensor—a “magnetoelastic biosensor”—and a scanner. The sensor, which is placed directly on the food surface, contains a bacteria-specific recognition layer coated with particles of “phage,” a virus that is able to recognize pathogenic bacteria. The scanner is passed over the sensor on the food and sounds an alarm if there are changes in the sensor’s

vibrational frequency, which occur if the sensor detects pathogens. The bacteria would stick to the phage, changing the rate of vibration. And different bio-recognition elements, or phage, target different bacteria—E2 phage is used to detect Salmonella, JRB7 phage targets Bacillus anthracis spores, and lytic phage targets Staphylococcus, Chai explains.

The team is even working on a way to have different “alarms” sound for the different bacteria. But that part of the technology is still under development, she says.

While Chai and her colleagues been researching magnetoelastic (ME) biosensors for the last six years, their work specifically on designing the surface-scanning coil detector that can detect bacteria on the food surface began two years ago. All previous detection methods require placing the ME biosensors inside a large coil to measure their vibrations, or resonant frequency, and then moving the sensors out of the coil for potential bacteria exposure on the food surface.

The sensors are then placed back inside the coil for the final resonant frequency measurement after bacteria exposure—adding up to a very “cumbersome” testing experience because of all the steps required, Chai says. (there is a figure to go with this that shows the difference between the two methods)

“With the old measurement method, only two frequency measurements were made—before and after bacteria exposure—whereas now, continuous, real-time measurements of the resonant frequency can be performed during bacteria exposure,” she says.

This project was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture with the anticipation of its practical application and ease of use in a variety of environments, Chai said.

“Our goal is to be able to test food safety with our portable biosensor system at each point of the food production and preparation process—at the farm or in the field, supermarket, or kitchen,” she adds.

The developers have already applied for a patent and were awaiting approval at the time this article was written. And multiple companies have expressed interest in the device, with at least one having met with the developers to discuss obtaining a license to manufacture it.

239

Learning and Serving

By Sean Forbes, Lisa Kensler, a n d B r i a n Pa r r 240

The Outdoor Classroom Project

T

he Outdoor Classroom Project is an outreach effort steeped in localism, utilizing social capital and capacity to address identified community needs. Building upon the history of Alabama agriculture to sustain its citizens, our project establishes infrastructure and instructional support.

Individual school districts are centrally responsible for K-12 education. During the past few years, accountability measures for meeting state and federal mandates have put enormous pressure on schools, classrooms, teachers, and students. While these pressures for improving student academic performance remain, the processes and measures are shifting in Alabama.

The Alabama State Department of Education (ALSDE) is promoting Plan 2020, “Every child a graduate. Every graduate prepared.” According to ALSDE, prepared graduates should not require remediation in their post-high school endeavors and they should “possess the ability to apply core academic skills to real-world situations through

collaboration with peers in problem-solving, precision, and punctuality in delivery of a product, and have a desire to be a lifelong learner.” Our Outdoor Classroom Project serves the aims of Plan 2020.

Outdoor spaces—gardens of different varieties— provide students with engaging learning opportunities that cross traditional content boundaries, making learning real, relevant, and meaningful.

Why Go Outdoors?

Extensive research demonstrates many positive outcomes associated with student time spent outdoors (Louv 2005). Productive vegetable gardens invite teachers to engage students in mastering traditional content, including math, science, and language arts. They also introduce students to the joys of planning, growing, harvesting, and eating fresh, delicious vegetables grown right outside their classroom windows. Furthermore, developing healthier eating habits is critical to reducing childhood obesity and improving overall wellness;

school gardens are one effective mechanism for doing so (Robinson et al. 2009).

Plan 2020 sets forth a challenging and promising vision for education in Alabama, and outdoor classrooms can contribute to the effort in substantial ways. However, developing the infrastructure and maintaining these outdoor spaces cannot be done with internal resources alone. It requires school personnel to find support from local social capital and capacity. So principals contact parent–teacher organizations (PTOs) and booster clubs. Businesses sponsor events and teams. Volunteers from the community provide instructional support.

These educators practice what school reform advocates call “localism”—considering the role of community families, neighborhoods, businesses, institutions, and organizations in improving schooling (Crowson and Goldring 2009). Localism recognizes context. Awareness of home and community beliefs, as well as environment, allows

241

local educators to understand students’ personal needs, identify and/or marshal resources, and meet non-local (and local) policy prescriptions.

The Outdoor Classroom Project grew out of an idea to address a number of community challenges associated with Alabama’s greatest economic export—food. Grandma’s cooking aside, by food we mean agriculture. Agriculture is Alabama’s largest industry with approximately 50,000 farms covering 9 million acres and producing more than $1 billion in exports (ALFA 2010). Our experiment with food is slightly less ambitious but no less organic.

The Setting 242

Our project is set in Opelika, Alabama, the county seat of Lee County with a population of approximately 27,000 (U.S. Census 2010). With 5,000-plus school-aged children, Opelika City Schools reflect the area’s higher-than-state-average ethnic diversity, with 43.5 percent African American students compared to the state’s 26.2 percent, 1.7 percent Asian American compared to the state’s 1.2 percent, and 4.4 percent Latino American compared to the state’s 3.9 percent.

In recent years, Opelika has experienced a cultural and economic renaissance of sorts. The historic downtown business district has been revived after decades of stagnation, and Opelika boasts the

area’s largest shopping area. Despite its strengths, more residents of Opelika live in poverty (22.1 percent) than the state average (17.1 percent).

Our Project—Year One: Sean Forbes My son, Moe, and his buddy Jake (son of our project’s community coordinator) enjoy school more than most. But we couldn’t tell you how many times they have complained about being academically bored. “We do the same thing every day,” they say. “Math and reading,” Moe says. “Yup, at our desks and in groups, math and reading,” Jake adds, shaking his head.

As educators, we don’t like the situation any more than our kids do. We bemoan the fact that accountability movements have marginalized other content areas in favor of language arts and mathematics about as much as we cringe at the idea that children do not spend more time learning outdoors. So we installed a garden.

Uncounted generations before us and the modern research we read today tell us that using the environment as a classroom provides a valuable, real-life context through which math, language arts, sciences, and other subject matters can be taught (Conroy and Walker 2000; Edney and Murphy 2010; Parr, Edwards and Leising 2006, 2008, 2009).

Research literature also suggests that school gardens have the added benefit of promoting nutrition. Students who participate in school garden projects tend to eat more fruits and vegetables and, in the process, are physically active (Robinson et al. 2009).

With this in mind, we approached Southview Primary School’s principal at the end of first grade and asked if we, as parents, could revitalize an unused courtyard. The 80-foot by 30-foot space opened into a grass lawn that covered half the area.

The other was filled with overgrown crepe myrtles, butterfly bushes, and weeds. Other courtyards in

the school fared better and were favorite relaxing spots for children and teachers.

Our plan was to create something similar that was also a place to teach and learn. Thankfully, our principal supported the plan, and we joined the increasing trend of establishing schoolyard gardens to provide students with engaging, hands-on learning opportunities that cross traditional subject area boundaries (Garcia-Ruiz, 2009).

In the fall of the next year, second-grade students came to the garden for a half-hour every other Friday during a scheduled one-hour enrichment period. Once students came to the space, they couldn’t get enough of it.

Working from the National Science Education Standards, we began with students determining how to use the space. All they were told is that they were designing and implementing a school garden that had to include enough space to hold multiple classes of students. One thing was clear—engaging students in the garden was not a problem.

Over the first weeks students focused on planning. After a close vote, students decided to keep the lawn as the meeting place and install flower and vegetable beds in the overgrown section. Then came the work. Space allowed for eight 4-foot by4-foot raised beds (constructed off-site). Students cleared debris, pulled weeds, spread mulch, filled

beds with soil, and planted/tended to their selected winter varieties. By semester’s end, students had designed and implemented a garden that produced three kinds of pansies, snapdragons, broccoli, collard and mustard greens, and lettuce—with fourand-a-half hours of involvement per student.

We began spring with the question we began with in the fall: What do you want to do with the garden? While they were content in the fall to grow plants that looked interesting, the students began the spring wanting more from their space.

They wanted something good to eat. When asked what food they wanted to grow, pizza was a top choice. So was ice cream. Unfortunately, not many vegetables received write-in votes.

After we challenged the feasibility of growing meat and dairy products, we channeled the students’ focus on foods they enjoy that are made of vegetables. Someone suggested soup. Someone else suggested salad. Finally, after talking about what they like to eat in restaurants, a student mentioned salsa. Mini-pandemonium broke out at the potential of having a chips and salsa party at semester’s end. After a quick vote, salsa was it by a landslide.

The spring semester was going to be spent growing tomatoes, onions, cilantro, and jalapeno peppers.

Students were provided with gardening journals and were expected to have them every time we

met. Each week students documented their fieldwork through a language arts and/or math activity reflective of state curriculum standards. Activities were designed to familiarize students with the lifecycle and characteristics of their selected vegetables and how the environment is related to their growth.

At the end of our project, we took the harvest and made salsa. No one wanted salsa that was too spicy, so we settled on mild and medium spicy salsas, each in chunky and pureed versions. At harvest we knew that we had more vegetables than we could use and asked the kids what we should do with them. We were a bit surprised that none of the kids suggested we merely throw them away.

243 One answer did spark interest: donating the excess produce to the local food bank. Several of the students said that they would be attending a summer program at the school and expressed interest in continuing to tend to the plants and package future harvests for donation to the local food bank.

That is what the second graders decided to do.

At the end our first year of involvement with the students, we were struck by what the students’ interests ignited. An outdoor classroom, available for all to use, was created. A wealth of science content was explored in support of language arts and math objectives. Produce was grown and consumed, but

a good amount was donated in service to others.

All of this was accomplished through a mere nine hours of instructional time and a little interest in student interests.

Our Project—Year Two At the start of the program, the scope of this project as university outreach was limited to installing a developmentally appropriate space for children in one school. It sometimes seemed that we had a tiger by the tail, because the project’s potential seemed to grow every time we talked to

244

students and teachers. Soon we were talking with other community members and business owners and, then, other school administrators.

By the end of the first year, localism was in full effect, and I was trying to keep up. We discovered a handful of teachers at other schools involving their students with gardening and related activities, and our conversations suggested that our interests were compatible. Soon two new schools agreed to partner with us, Northside Intermediate School (grades 3–5) and Opelika Middle School (grades 6–8). Meanwhile, we learned that

fresh produce is not regularly available to food bank clients. So the staff of the Food Bank of East Alabama joined our partnership.

School principals and interested faculty from each school met with our group, and we agreed to provide garden-based instruction for at least one period a week for 12 weeks each semester of the school year. Consensus emerged around the potential of the garden, but two significant issues had to be addressed moving forward.

First, K–8 teachers have no formal training in agricultural education. Though many teachers have knowledge and skill on the topic, it was clear that if the project was going to be sustainable, instructional support was needed to grow a culture receptive to using the outdoor classroom. Next, a decision had to be made about how to formally use the garden to support the academic objectives of the school. Thankfully, I had been consulting with colleagues along the way (Lisa Kensler and Brian Parr), and they joined our partnership with Opelika City Schools.

The Outdoor Classrooms This summer we finished the installation of outdoor classrooms at Northside Intermediate and Opelika Middle School, in addition to sprucing up the space at Southview Primary. At Northside

Intermediate, three 16-foot by 16-foot raised beds were already in place. We added a trellised 20-foot by 45-foot raised pumpkin patch and seating for a class to an existing but underdeveloped area. An interior 20-foot by 75-foot courtyard at Opelika Middle School was transformed from a sea of green to an ornamental garden that includes a hedge shaped into the school letters (OMS) and seating for 25. A produce garden was installed in an outside, rear (6-foot by 80-foot) courtyard.

Each garden was built around the developmental and educational needs of the students. Activities directed by the undergraduate students are intended to promote three learning goals: • Identify/classify issues of the lifecycle of plants and related environmental elements, • Apply knowledge of content to maintain outdoor classrooms, and • Experiment with content knowledge to foster awareness of sustainability.

These goals address an increasingly complex integration of cognitive skills and are reflected in both students’ lack of prior experience and biological maturation. Southview’s activities are largely directed toward identifying/classifying.

The site provides room for multiple displays that

are accessible by students, but there is insufficient space for significant production. Bed design allows students to get a 360-degree perspective of a plant but provides minimal working space.

The gardens at Northside and Opelika Middle School allow for more application than those at Southview; areas are larger and include greater plant diversity. The greatest amount of uncommitted space is at Opelika Middle School.

A 6-foot by 40-foot area is reserved for student experimentation.

Growing Forward The infrastructure is now in place. Strong partnerships are in place. We remain open to expanding as well as deepening the mutually beneficial relationships that have been established.

Each school has at least one garden area for engaged, active learning and serving. There is also a small core of critically important and supportive teachers, staff, and administrators within each school. The schedule is set for Auburn University’s pre-service teachers to practice their craft with real students, in a real context. Just as plants need soil, water, and sunlight to grow, new learning programs and partnerships need time, space, and human/ social capital to grow.

Our work going forward will track the possible dissemination of garden-related engagement throughout the K–12 schools’ curriculum, explore the development of teacher capacity to integrate garden-related learning across the curriculum, track the development of pre-service teachers, track changes in student attitudes and knowledge about garden-related content, and document the production of food sourced to the Food Bank of East Alabama.

The authors would like to acknowledge Eric Hogan, doctoral student in Educational Psychology, and Community Coordinator Gina Smith for their contributions to this article.

245

Food and Health

246

By Bonnie Sanderson

Perspectives from Nursing “He who takes medicine and neglects diet wastes the skill of his doctors.” Chinese Proverb

The relationship between food and health outcomes is well established. Food intake is driven by necessity; we need to eat to live. The spectrum of food and health issues spans from the lack of essential energy and nutrient intake that may lead to malnutrition to issues more common in developed countries, where eating is more driven by behavioral, social, and environmental influences than by physiological need. It is the latter issue that leads to weight gain and obesity, which has become a national and global public health issue.

A Major Global Health Concern The obesity epidemic is real, and the prevalence of obesity has increased at alarming rates in the last decades of the 20th century. The World Health

Sanderson (second from right) and nursing students introduce health promotion topics at a health fair.

Organization (WHO) defines being overweight and obesity as “abnormal or excessive fat accumulation that may impair health” (WHO 2013). The classification of weight status is determined by the body mass index (BMI), which is the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters (kg/m2). Normal weight is classified as a BMI of 18.5 to 24.9, overweight is 25-29.9, and obesity is a BMI equal to 30 or more.

In the United States, more than one-third of adult men and women and almost 17 percent of youth were obese in 2009–2010 (Ogden, Carroll, & Flegal 2012). The increasing numbers of children and adults who are obese also increases the risk of a number of associated health conditions, such as high blood pressure, abnormal lipid blood levels, and type 2 diabetes. These dire consequences not only place a burden on the individual’s health and quality of life, they also put a strain on our healthcare resources and add to growing healthcare costs.

Even more alarming is the growing global problem of obesity. Once associated with highincome countries, obesity is now prevalent in low- and middle-income countries. WHO (2013) reports that overweight and obesity rates nearly doubled between 1980 and 2008 and estimates that at least 2.8 million people die each year as a result of conditions associated with obesity.

Globally, 44 percent of diabetes cases, 23 percent of ischemic heart disease cases, and 7–41 percent of certain cancers are attributable to being overweight and obesity.

Root of the Problem At the individual level, obesity is primarily the result of an “energy imbalance” between the calories consumed (e.g., the type and amount of food) and the calories expended (e.g., the frequency, duration, and types of physical activity and exercise). While it may sound like a simple solution for individuals to “eat less and move

247

fat intake should be limited; fat consumption needs to be shifted from saturated fats to unsaturated fats; and the public should increase consumption of fruits, vegetables, pulses (such as beans, peas, and lentils), whole grains, and nuts, as well as limiting the intake of sugar and salt. (WHO 2013)

Treat or Prevent Obesity? more,” it is much more complex. In the past several decades, environmental and economic influences affect health behavior choices.

Industrial and commercial influences have made cheap foods that are high calorie and often laden 248 with health-adverse ingredients easily accessible and convenient for replacing healthier alternatives. Technology facilitates the perception that sedentary lifestyles are “normal” in everyday life, whether at work, home, or school. Since less than half of adults achieve the amount of physical activity recommended to achieve health benefits, many may not perceive their current low level of activity as a barrier to achieving or maintaining a healthy weight. Individuals should engage in at least 30 minutes of regular, moderate-intensity physical activity on most days (at least five) and more may be required for weight control. Dietary choices should help achieve and maintain a healthy weight; total

Quick and simple solutions to “fix” obesity offered through self-help books, gadgets and gimmicks, fad diets, and other approaches may not have solid, scientific evidence to support the promised results.

Unfortunately, most of these approaches have not resulted in success rates, especially in the area of long-term weight management.

Medical interventions such as bariatric surgical techniques are also on the rise. Some of these interventions have been shown to be effective in weight loss and better management of risk factors such as diabetes and hypertension, but these procedures are expensive and have mixed results in long-term weight management.

With a focus on food and health, there are interesting and promising results from observational and clinical research studies about the health benefits of the Mediterranean Diet, especially among those with cardiac disease. The Mediterranean Diet is characterized by a high

intake of olive oil, fresh fruits and vegetables, whole-grain cereals, nuts, legumes, fish, and poultry and a low intake of dairy products, red meat, processed meats, and refined sugars. A large-scale randomized clinical trial evaluated the effectiveness of the Mediterranean Diet for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (Estruch et al. 2013).

Findings concluded that among persons at high cardiovascular risk, the Mediterranean Diet reduced the incidence of major cardiovascular events when compared to a control diet (advice to reduce dietary fat) over four years.

While individuals do need to accept personal responsibility for dietary and physical activity choices, individual behavior and healthier choices must be shaped and supported by environments that help make a healthy lifestyle affordable and easily accessible. Social and economic development needs to be supported by policies in the areas of agriculture, transport, urban planning, environment, education, food processing, distribution, and marketing that positively influence diet and physical activity preferences.

AU School of Nursing: Research The following provides some specific examples of how the Auburn University School of Nursing

(AUSON) connects food and health within its mission through scholarship/research activities.

Research focus

Current efforts are building a stronger infrastructure to support research and scholarship.

This includes establishing a record of scholarship through faculty publications and participating in interdisciplinary research. The following are examples of AUSON faculty research related to health and food: Diabetes self-management and technology: Dr. Caralise Hunt was awarded a grant from the Academy of Medical Surgical Nurses to conduct a pilot study to determine the feasibility of using an application on Apple® iPad® technology to support diabetes self-management among participants in an employer-sponsored diabetes self-management program.

Participants were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group for a threemonth period. The intervention group participants logged their daily diabetes self-management activities using the iPad application; the control group participants were instructed to log daily diabetes self-management activities in the provided journal. At the end of three months, results were analyzed, and a crossover design was used so both

groups had an opportunity to use both the iPad application and the paper journal for logging selfmanagement activities. Data analyses and report generation are currently in process.

Caregiver support project: This research program in caregiving, led by Dr. Kathy Jo Ellison, seeks to address the challenge of a growing elderly population and lack of education and other resources for their caregivers, particularly in rural underserved areas. The primary goal of the research is to increase access to educational caregiving information to families and healthcare providers in rural areas. Current work has focused on developing and evaluating an individualized education and support program that is accessible, user-friendly, and transportable. Specific to food and health, a designated module of the caregiver educational program focuses on nutrition and food safety for both caregivers and their care recipients.

Childhood obesity prevention: Dr. Bonnie Sanderson is involved in an Auburn University Food Systems Institute research grant-writing team to help identify “Effective Obesity Prevention Strategies in Early Childhood in Rural Alabama.”

Alabama is the fifth-most obese state in the U.S. and ranks 14th in childhood obesity. These rates are even higher among low-income, rural, and minority populations.

An interdisciplinary team (academic researchers, healthcare providers, community advocates, and public health providers) proposes a multilevel approach to explore factors associated with the prevention of childhood obesity among low-income communities in rural Alabama. While individual behavior may be a primary target of behavior change, successful interventions must address environmental factors amenable to change. Based on the findings from this exploratory research, social cognitive and behavioral economic theories will be used to develop a community-based parent/family intervention. The goal is to promote the adoption and maintenance of healthy lifestyle choices among parents and their children to prevent exces- 249 sive weight gain in early childhood.

Conclusion To address the health concerns related to obesity, prevention strategies must be prioritized at all levels. Globally, this requires a culturally relevant, population-based approach that facilitates synergy among a variety of entities: health-oriented agencies and organizations, government at all levels, multi-disciplinary healthcare providers, and university teaching and research faculty.

By Barb Struempler 250

a n d S o n d r a M . Pa r m e r

Body Quest: Food of the Warrior

Combatting Childhood Obesity Through Nutrition Education

L

ane Hornsby is a pretty typical 8-year-old.

He has strong opinions about what he likes and doesn’t like, including the foods he’ll eat. Fried chicken is a definite “yes.” Peas and cornbread, absolutely—“like any good country boy should,” mom Kimberly says. But broccoli, carrots, and cauliflower, no way!

That was before Lane and his third-grade class at Lineville Elementary School in Lineville, Alabama, started learning about fruits and vegetables through Body Quest: Food of the Warrior. This innovative statewide nutrition education initiative was developed through the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES) at Auburn University.

It is funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed), which is known in Alabama as the Nutrition Education Program.

Now Lane not only will eat the once-shunned veggies, but he requests them as a snack. And he isn’t alone in his newfound appreciation for health-

ful foods. Fellow third-graders in schools across Alabama also are embracing a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. What’s more, they’re applying that information at home.

Beyond getting children to eat cauliflower, Body Quest has a far greater purpose as its goal: combat Photo by Lisa Mastropietro

This third-grader from Russell County (Ala.) likes Body Quest nutrition classes, especially tasting vegetables.

With the encouragement of eating fruits and vegetables from Body Quest, he now enjoys new and crunchy flavors.

the rising rate of childhood obesity in Alabama.

The alarming facts are that Alabama ranks fifth nationally in most-obese population and has the fourth-highest level of overweight children at 36 percent. Statistics also indicate that the obesity rate in Alabama could reach a staggering 63 percent by 2030 unless something is done to reverse that track.

251 The good news is that a lifestyle change as simple as adding more fruits and vegetables to diets can make a significant difference. Research shows that states where people are eating their fruits and vegetables have the lowest rates of obesity. Fruits and vegetables are packed with powerful nutrients yet have few calories. In their natural state, they are virtually fat- and sodium-free. Exchanging fruits and vegetables for calorically dense foods is an obesity-prevention technique for both children and adults.

Eating more fruits and vegetables—even substituting them for one snack a day—is a positive habit

for youth to adopt to prevent obesity. Learning a habit early in life is certainly easier than trying to break one later on. After all, kids are like gelatin; the idea is to put in as many good things as possible before it sets.

Body Quest: Food of the Warrior Is Born Struempler and Parmer are coordinators with the Nutrition Education Program and members of the Body Quest team. Going into the developmental stage of this bold nutrition initiative, the team faced some critical and overarching questions: Can you make a change in a child’s eating habits through education—not just 252 a knowledge change but a genuine, transforming behavioral change? And how do you convince children that fruits and vegetables aren’t just good for them but taste good, too?

The resulting 17-week program was developed and refined over a four-year period from 2009– 2012. Named Body Quest: Food of the Warrior, the program targets third-graders in Alabama schools.

This particular demographic was chosen because children aged 8 or 9 are old enough to make some decisions and to evaluate themselves and what they eat. Also, those in schools with a great number of reduced-price school lunches often are at a disadvantage in terms of resources. This

puts them at a greater risk of health problems associated with obesity.

The novel approach to nutrition offers both traditional and nontraditional teaching elements designed to provide a dynamic and interactive learning experience. The objectives are to promote greater fruit and vegetable consumption along with other lifestyle choices that support good health.

Among the innovative elements are seven nutrition iPad© apps featuring animé-style characters. The iPad apps were some of the first nutrition education apps produced nationally.

The program had to contain a technology component. Today’s youth, even as young as toddlers, are technology-driven. They must be met on their own ground with nutritional education.

The educator teaches the lesson and then the nutrition information is reinforced with an iPad app that’s very engaging to a third-grader. If you look at what this age group is looking at, animé is absolutely in there. The cartoon format captures their imaginations.

The timeframe for implementation is important, too. Seventeen weeks may seem like a long time for nutrition education, but nutrition can’t be taught in a week or two anymore than math can be covered in a few lessons. It has to be a priority.

Schools recognize that combatting childhood

obesity is a priority, so they’ve been committed to allowing coordinators to go in and work with the students. It has been a very synergistic partnership.

Ultimately, the kids are the winners as they adopt lifelong positive eating habits.

The children certainly have been responsive to the nutrition education, especially to the colorful animé characters. Each app in the Body Quest curriculum is directed by one of six characters who teach topics of balanced meals, food groups, food nutrient function, and healthy snacks. While the nutrition education topics are traditional, iPad apps reach and energize youth in new ways.

The popular characters are: • Body Doctor. She gets her super warrior powers by eating fresh fruits. She thinks the brighter the food, the better it is for you.

• Muscle Max. He gets in shape with lots of exercise and by eating protein-rich foods such as meats, beans, and milk. (He’s a favorite of the boys.)

• Graino Supa. His super warrior energy comes from eating whole grains such as oatmeal, brown rice, or whole wheat bread.

• Shining Rainbow. She thinks that vegetables are not just for special occasions; they should be

eaten at every meal, including snacks. They act as a magic armor that protects and keeps us looking and feeling good. (Girls love Shining Rainbow.)

• Fiberlicious. She is wild about eating foods filled with fiber. They keep our hearts healthy, contain lots of energy, and keep our systems clean.

• Super Slurper. He loves to drink water because it helps to keep our bodies feeling great and hydrated.

And let’s not forget our villain. Filling that role is Trans Fat Cat. He appears in every app and loves to eat chips, cake, and fried foods. Over the course of the apps, the Body Quest characters find ways to “rub off ” on Trans Fat Cat. As a result he changes his eating habits. Students were overheard making comments about Trans Fat Cat, such as “I’m gonna teach him to eat better,” and “He isn’t going to change my mind about eating healthy foods.”

The innovative approach has proven to be extremely popular on all fronts. Students love learning nutrition through technology. School administrators are appreciative of this technology as a way to teach nutrition to deal with the reality of childhood obesity.

Going into the classrooms, each Extension county educator is equipped with a mobile labora-

tory of 20 iPads. Supplementing the technology are related teaching materials that include a leader’s guide, posters, card decks, vow cards, power bands, stickers, T-shirts, and scrolling banners.

Emma Anne Hallman, SNAP Extension educator for Body Quest in Marion and Walker counties, says, “Students love to receive the T-shirts, character stickers, power bands, and Body Quest deck of cards. I believe these allow them to feel more

engaged and prideful when participating in the program. I can see the effects of these nutritionreinforcement materials in both the children and their parents.”

Although iPad nutrition apps are a powerful teaching resource, the best teaching tool the educators bring to the classroom is a variety of fruits and vegetables for tasting. The more opportunities there are to taste a food, the greater

Photo by Emma Anne Hallman

253

Third-grade teacher Dee Cleveland, with Body Quest students at Hackleburg (Ala.) Elementary School. “They were eager to try different fruits and vegetables that they had never tasted before. And of course they loved the iPads®.”

Best of all, they were motivated to pay attention to the nutrition messages.

the likelihood that a person will eat that food. In addition, educators are guaranteeing that students have access to these fresh foods by bringing them into the classroom.

Body Quest classroom tastings allow children the opportunity to realize they like foods such as vegetables. The fruits and vegetables tasted in Body Quest classes are those commonly available through school lunches. These foods are chosen so that when they are on a student’s lunch tray, they will be eaten rather than thrown away. This also encourages parents to buy more fruits and Photo by Meaghan Luker Robertson

254

Kimberly Hornsby with son Lane, a Body Quest student at Lineville (Ala.) Elementary School. “Lane came home almost every week asking if we could purchase something new at the grocery store. One snack that he has continued to request is broccoli, carrots and cauliflower!”

vegetables. After all, parents of these young children are like the rest of us—unless they know that their child will eat the food, they probably won’t spend money on it.

Choosing Vegetables Over Chips and Cookies To the students in Dee Cleveland’s third-grade class at Hackleburg Elementary School in Hackleburg, Alabama, Body Quest educator Hallman was like a rock star.

For more than four months, Hallman was an integral part of their world. Each week she came to their class, introducing them to experiences and tastes some students had never encountered.

“Every week they would ask ‘Is she coming today? What are we going to get to eat?’” Hallman says. “They were eager to try different fruits and vegetables they had never tasted before. And of course they loved the iPads.”

Best of all, she says, they were motivated to pay attention to the nutrition messages. Hallman started classes with Body Quest exercises designed to get everyone energized and ready for the lesson. After a few minutes of Squash Squats, Carrot Twists, Turnip Tummy, and Motion in the Ocean, they were ready to go. The lesson that followed alternated between the introduction of a new nutri-

tion concept one week and a review of that lesson the next, which was reinforced using the iPad apps.

And with every lesson came fresh fruits and veggies to sample. Fruit options varied between blueberries, cantaloupe, strawberries, oranges, pears, pineapples, and peaches. Options on the veggie side included tomatoes, squash, broccoli, cauliflower, carrots, bell peppers, spinach, and dark, leafy lettuce. A one-ounce cup of ranch dressing for dipping was distributed with vegetables.

Although Hallman was physically with the class for only about 45 minutes at a time, the learning continued throughout the week.

“Each day the children had to record what they ate for lunch,” Cleveland says. “That helped to keep the lesson fresh in their minds for next week and to apply what they had learned. And they were faithful in their task. As soon as we got back from lunch, they would let me know that they needed to write down what they ate. They were proud to be able to report the fruits and vegetables they had eaten.”

“Students really loved trying the different vegetables, especially the spinach,” Hallman says.

“I knew the education was really sinking in when the students recognized spinach as being a vegetable that was offered at Subway! I had countless students tell me that they tried spinach

on their sandwiches instead of lettuce. They loved bragging on themselves about that.”

Meaghan Luker Robertson, the instructor assigned to Lane Hornsby’s class, had similar experiences. “A lot of my children would choose the vegetables from the tasting as their daily snack instead of the snack-room chips or cookies!”she says.

Also surprising to her was how much the kids loved discussion. “It gave them a chance to speak freely about what fruits and vegetables they loved and what they didn’t love,” she says. “We even discussed how their families incorporated healthy meals into their day.”

At the conclusion of the program, several of Robertson’s students’ parents continued to text or call her to report on their child’s progress. “One of the children had a friend over for a play date and they requested veggies with ranch dip for their snack!” Robertson says.

Possibly the most unusual program feedback occurred in the checkout line at Wal-Mart. “As I handed the sales associate my tax-exempt card, she noticed that I was only buying vegetables,” Hallman says. “She asked if I was the Body Quest lady who visited her daughter’s classroom each week.”

The woman went on to say that she noticed a difference in her daughter’s eating habits since she started the program. “Now at each meal the

daughter would tell her family which food group each of the foods came from. She would even point out healthier foods when grocery shopping,” Hallman says. “The child also was making healthier snack choices, choosing fruits over chips and cookies. This mother was so thankful for a nutrition program like this that also introduced her child to technology.”

Hackleburg teacher Dee Cleveland says she understands this mother’s gratitude. She is a parent of a Body Quest student in addition to being the teacher in a Body Quest classroom. Her daughter, Kameryn, 8, is in the other third-grade Body Quest class at Hackleburg.

“My daughter was already pretty healthconscience, as much as an 8- or 9-year-old can be,” Cleveland says. “But I started to see a difference in what she chose to eat and drink. In addition to eating more fruits and vegetables, she started drinking more water thanks to Super Slurper’s hydration messages.”

Lane Hornsby’s mom, Kimberly, shared that Lane has been much more experimental with foods.

“He will try a fruit or vegetable prepared several different ways,” Hornsby says. “Before the Body Quest program, if he tried it once raw and didn’t like it, then he assumed he didn’t like it cooked either. He came home almost every week asking if

we could purchase something new at the grocery store. One snack that he has continued to request is broccoli, carrots, and cauliflower! He has even tried onions on an occasion or two, which was not a consideration at all before. This experience reminded me that I needed to continue to teach Lane good eating habits as he grows older.”

Data Support Efficacy of the Program Testimonials may be important to show the human side of a program, but the bottom-line question is whether nutrition education works.

Evaluations need to have objective assessment tools in place to measure the program’s viability and vitality based on replicable outcomes.

Numbers are subject to individual experiences, yet they tell the real story.

In the 2012-13 academic year, a total of 2,477 third-graders in 65 schools were involved in Body Quest. These students attended schools where half or more of the student population received free or reduced-price lunches; in several schools, 100 percent of the students received a free or reducedprice school lunch.

For research and testing purposes, SNAP-Ed educators randomly chose six classes to serve as the test groups—three classes served as the treatment groups, receiving the Body Quest

255

256

nutrition education, and three served as the control groups, receiving no nutrition intervention.

Treatment groups were in different schools than control groups.

The treatment groups received two weeks of pre-assessment, 13 weeks of nutrition lessons, and two weeks of post-assessments. Each phase included fruit and vegetable tastings. The control group received only pre- and post-assessments, with no nutrition education or food tastings. The demographics of the groups paralleled each other, each being in the vicinity of 49 percent female, 54 percent Caucasian, 43 percent African-American, and 3 percent Hispanic.

A What’s for Lunch (W4L) form was used to assess changes in fruit and vegetable consumption of Body Quest students. This checklist is used by students to self-report consumption of foods provided as part of the Child Nutrition Program school lunch. W4L has been used for eight years in SNAP-Ed as an evaluation tool for outcome evaluations. W4L forms were customized daily based on each school’s weekly lunch menu. Immediately after lunch, students used the checklist to indicate what they had eaten that day.

Upon collection of W4L forms, educators entered data for analyses. Growth modeling was used to examine overall changes in fruit and vegetable

consumption. Analyses were conducted using two data sets. First, data from students in treatment and control groups were analyzed for changes in fruit and vegetable consumption across pre- and postassessment periods. Secondly, data from treatmentgroup students only were analyzed for weekly fruit and vegetable consumption changes across the 17week program. Each analysis provided significant findings for Extension education.

Outcomes at the end of the 17 weeks indicated significant increases in both fruit and vegetable consumption within the treatment group compared to the control group. Vegetable consumption increased more than fruit consumption for treatment group students. Given that fruit consumption is typically an easier eating habit to adopt, this finding shows that children can like vegetables, too.

Based on a second analysis, using 17 weekly data points for the treatment group only, results showed that both fruit and vegetable increases followed similar patterns of change. There were increases in both fruit and vegetable consumption up to week 10. This was followed by a stable pattern to the end of the study. This suggests that programs can be implemented with a minimum of 10 lessons and still have an impact on students’ fruit and vegetable consumption. This justifies and lends creditability

to long-term Extension nutrition programs such as SNAP-Ed. Clearly, both subjective and objective data support the hypothesis that weekly nutrition education programs such as those offered through Body Quest can promote increased consumption of fruits and vegetables as a means to prevent childhood obesity.

Body Quest: Beyond Alabama It is estimated that reducing the average body mass index (BMI) of Alabama’s residents by just 5 percent by 2030 could help thousands of people avoid obesity-related diseases. For a 6-foot-tall person weighing 200 pounds, that would be the equivalent of losing roughly 10 pounds. The overall

resultant savings in health-care costs would be more than $9 billion. Those kinds of statistics get people to sit up and take notice.

One of the unexpected outcomes of Body Quest has been the “value added” to existing and new partnerships for SNAP-Ed. As a result of the program’s evidence-based effectiveness, exciting high-tech methodology, and the weekly fruit and vegetable tastings, the nutrition program is now in demand for inclusion in school systems beyond Alabama.

At present, a partnership between Louisiana State University and Auburn University Extension System has been formed in order to replicate the program throughout Louisiana.

Body Quest is free to any school that wishes to implement it (www.BodyQuest.aces.edu). It is easy to replicate, as all materials are readily available at no cost to the school. For those with iPad access, the apps are available at no charge through the Apple® Store.

Access to all of these great resources allows anyone to use Body Quest to prevent childhood obesity and to make it part of the cultural fabric of their state. Educators’ only limitation will be finding sufficient time to reach all youth.

For teachers in the public school system, such as Dee Cleveland, who daily see the effects of poor eating habits on children, the addition of Body

Quest to the curriculum is invaluable.

“This program gives the children knowledge of how fruits and vegetables help you and what they do to keep your body and mind healthy,” Cleveland says. “As a teacher, you see the importance in them having that knowledge. With that comes hope that this knowledge will spark a long-term change to eat more fruits and vegetables.”

Hornsby agrees. “I have always tried to make sure that Lane eats well and is introduced to a variety of foods. As a parent, though, it doesn’t matter sometimes how badly we want our child to do something. He just won’t budge,” she says. “But a teacher or program director can make things seem fun and exciting. I believe that this program would have a 257 great impact on every child who participated in it.”

By introducing young children to fruits and vegetables in a way that is engaging and empowering, Body Quest is helping children establish healthful eating patterns that hopefully will impact their choices for a lifetime.

Acknowledgments: Body Quest is composed of a team of ACES professionals and county educators through Auburn University, elementary school administrators and teachers, school lunch personnel, third-graders, and their parents.

Healthy Snacking Recommendations 258

By Claire A. Zizza

Snacking Benefits for Older Adults

H

ear the term “snack,” and many Americans might think of a bag of greasy potato chips, chocolate-chip cookies, or some other sugar- or salt-laden indulgence. “Snacking” does not have the best connotation. However, snacking can actually help Americans achieve their food and nutrient recommendations, which may help us avoid certain chronic diseases. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) issued in 2010 emphasize two major concepts: “Maintain caloric balance over time to achieve and sustain a healthy weight” and “Focus on consuming nutrient-dense foods and beverages” (DGA 2010). According to the 2010 DGA, a healthy diet should include nutrient-dense foods and beverages such as vegetables, fruits, whole grains, fat-free or low-fat milk and milk products, seafood, lean meats and poultry, eggs, legumes, nuts, and seeds. Solid fats, added sugars, and refined grains are items that should be curbed.

While DGA specifically recommends the foods and nutrients to increase in our diets, as well as

those to limit, individual dietary behaviors to achieve these recommendations have not been laid out. Although additional scientific reports have focused on these dietary behaviors since the DGA advisory committee review, a clear consensus regarding the nutrition-related health impacts of snacking or eating frequent small meals remains

elusive ( Johnson 2010, McCrory, 2011, Mesas 2010, Miller 2013, Palmer 2009, Palmer 2011).

The health-promoting qualities of foods and beverage “snacks” have been debated because these items are often considered to contribute primarily empty calories from fat and added sugars. It has also been suggested that people do not compensate for their increased energy intake from snacking 259 by decreasing their intake at other meals (Zizza 2001). Consequently, consuming snacks may lead to a positive energy balance—in other words, weight gain. Conversely, other researchers contend that most snacks are high in carbohydrates and low in fat, and the replacement of fat with carbohydrates may help achieve and sustain a healthy weight (Palmer 2009).

An underlying reason for the confusion regarding the health effects of snacking may be the diversity of study populations. In fact, the influence of snacking likely varies with different groups and may make important contributions to a healthy

bring about reduced dietary intakes. Many older adults have limited resources and have difficulty purchasing food. Lastly, social factors, widowhood, and eating alone may deter a healthy diet. Snacking may be a means for older adults to obtain nutrients they are missing by consuming only three meals a day. Specifically, snacking contributes to the energy level, macronutrients, micronutrients, and fluid intakes of older adults.

diet among older adults (â&#x2030;Ľ 65 years) in particular.

Further complicating the matter, reports describing the contribution of snacking to adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; diets have generally focused on single nutrients.

Because of the complexity of dietary intake and the possible interaction of nutrients, it is often difficult to attribute health outcomes to the effects of a single dietary component.

Snacking and Older Adults The growth in the number and proportion of older adults is unparalleled in the history of the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2013). Longer life spans and aging 260 baby boomers will result in doubling the olderadult population of Americans during the next 25 years, to about 72 million. By 2030, older adults will account for roughly 20 percent of the U.S. population. Dietary behaviors are powerful, modifiable lifestyle factors that may promote additional years of high functioning, living independently, and higher quality of life.

Although there has been a corresponding increase in the prevalence of being overweight and obesity among older adults, it is estimated that one in three community-dwelling older adults will ultimately experience unintentional weight loss (Wernette 2011, 114). Unintentional weight

loss, the involuntary decline in body weight over time, is an important health risk factor among older persons and a strong predictor of functional limitations, admission to nursing care facilities, and mortality. After age 70 to 75 years, average body weight decreases, even in healthy people, because of the loss of body fat and lean muscle tissue (sarcopenia). This predisposes them to continued weight loss, malnutrition, and increased morbidity and mortality.

Physiological changes in taste and flavor sensations as well as altered sensations of thirst, hunger, and satiety can result in decreased dietary intakes.

Physiological changes that take place during the progression of chronic diseases can cause anorexia and be compounded by medications. Compromised physical functioning, which can make it difficult to prepare food and feed oneself, can also

Macronutrients

Snacking is a behavoir among older adults (Zizza 2007). Older adults who snacked had higher intakes of energy, protein, carbohydrate, total fat, and saturated fat, with snacking contributing approximately a quarter of older adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; daily energy and carbohydrate intakes and a fifth of their daily fat intake. The contribution of snacking to daily protein intakes was less than that from carbohydrates and fat, yet snacking still provided 14 percent of their protein intakes.

Although snacking may have contributed more carbohydrates and fat, these results do not support the contention that snacking contributes only fat and added sugar to the diet.

Older adults who snacked and those who did not snack reported, on average, five-and-a-half and three-and-a-half total eating occasions per day, respectively. Those older adults who snacked report-

ed on average two-and-a-half snacking occasions per day, and each snacking occasion contributed 150 calories. Snackers and nonsnackers consumed comparable amounts of energy during meals, but older adults who did not report snacking had, on average, very low intakes of energy. These findings suggest that older adults who reported eating only during meal occasions were unable to compensate for their lack of energy with this eating habit.

Intake of vitamins C and E, beta-carotene, and copper, which have been widely acknowledged as dietary concerns for older adults, were all related to snacking frequency. These four nutrients have antioxidant potential in the body, thus helping prevent health problems such as age-related eye disease, atherosclerosis, cancer, coronary heart disease, diabetes, respiratory diseases, and rheumatoid arthritis.

Micronutrients

Fluid intake

In addition to the energy contribution of snacking, we examined the micronutrient contribution of this dietary behavior.

As snacking frequency increased, older adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; daily intakes of vitamins A, C, and E, as well as beta-carotene, increased noticeably. However, intakes of the B-complex vitamins, vitamin K, and lycopene were not linked to snacking frequency.

Older adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; intakes of magnesium, copper, and potassium also increased markedly as snacking frequency increased, although intakes of calcium, phosphorous, iron, and zinc were not associated with snacking. Intakes of selenium decreased with snacking frequency. Given the food sources of selenium (fish, organ meat, Brazil nuts), the relationship between snacking and this mineral was somewhat expected.

Older adults are often susceptible to dehydration because of insufficient water intake and increased water excretion. Promoting adequate fluid intake has been noted as the most important modifiable health behavior for maintaining fluid homeostasis in older adults. Unfortunately, many older adults deliberately avoid drinking beverages because they fear nighttime incontinence. Whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s more, they may not even recognize that they are thirsty because the sensation of thirst decreases with age. Prolonged dehydration has been shown to cause kidney failure, kidney stones, urinary tract infections, bowel cancer, and even death.

We examined total water intake differences among three older age groups (65-74, 75-84, and 85 years and older). We found total water intake for the middle-old (75-84 years) and oldest-old

261

consumed as snacks was considerably less for the two older age groupings when compared to the young-old group. The water contribution from beverages consumed during meal occasions was not different, however. These fluid balance findings parallel our energy balance findings—older adults did not make up for a snacking deficit at meal occasions.

Nutrition-Related Benefits of Snacking

262

(85 years and older) was lower than water intake for the younger-old (65-74 years). Total water intake was based on the contributions from drinking water, beverages, and food sources. The relative contribution of drinking was comparable for all three age groups, while the relative contribution from food was slightly greater for the oldestold compared to the youngest-old. Compared to the young-old group, the relative contribution of beverages to total water intake was lower in the middle-old and lowest in the oldest-old.

We took it a step further and evaluated the water intake from beverages at meals versus beverages at snack occasions. The water intake from beverages

Failing physical function can limit older adults’ daily activities, predispose them to falls, and increase their mortality and morbidity risk. Gait speed is often used to measure physical function because it is convenient, adequate, and reliable, and, furthermore, has been recommended as a “geriatric vital sign” to assess the overall health status among older adults (Studenski 2003; MonteroOdasso 2004, from Xu 2013).

Since we observed snacking to be positively associated with energy, macronutrient, micronutrient, and fluid intake, this dietary behavior may influence gait speed through multiple pathways. Inadequate protein and energy intakes may contribute to functional decline and, as a result, gait speed, through increased loss of muscle mass, decreased energy reserves, decreased immune function, increased skin fragility, and poor healing.

Furthermore, physical activity may be positively associated with eating frequency, as individuals with high levels of physical activity eat more often because of greater appetite (Palmer 2009). Being physically active may increase older adults’ appetites and promote greater energy intake, which seems to promote a healthy gait speed. It has also been noted that cutting back on snacking may actually work against recommendations encouraging regular exercise, because fewer, larger meals may lead to gastric fullness and lethargy, which may reduce motivation to exercise.

In addition, measures of snacking behaviors such as frequency and percentage of total daily intake from snacking have been found to be positively associated with gait speed (Xu 2013). Participants who snacked four or more times in a day had faster gait speeds. And those whose snacking contributed 20 percent or more to their daily energy intake had faster gait speeds than those whose snacking contributed to less than 10 percent of their intake.

Developing national recommendations regrading snacking is difficult. Food and nutrient needs of indviduals vary depending on oage (Wernette 2011). Our work has shown that snacking may be health-promoting, especially with respect to energy and fluid balance, for older adults.

o

n

f

o

o

d

s

y

s

t

e

m

s

T

he health-promoting qualities of foods and beverage â&#x20AC;&#x153;snacksâ&#x20AC;? have been debated because these items are often considered to contribute primarily empty calories from fat and added sugars.

263

Works Cited

264

Food Security: Conceptualizing Public Policy by Frost Rollins and Kathleen Hale

Deserts and Food Hinterlands. Journal of Planning Education and Research 34: 204-218.

Agranoff, R., and McGuire, M. 2004. Collaborative Public Management: New Strategies for Local Governments. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

McEntee, J., and Agyeman, J. 2009. Towards the development of a GIS method for identifying rural food deserts: Geographic access in Vermont, USA. Applied Geography 30: 165-176.

Andrews, M. 2010. Food Security in the United States. United States Department of Agricultural Economic Research Service.

Accessed September 12, 2012. http://www.ers.usda.gov/ Briefing/FoodSecurity/community.htm

Morton, L.W., Bitto, E.A., Oakland, M.J., Sand. M. 2008.

Accessing Food Resources: Rural and Urban Patterns of Giving and Getting Food. Agriculture and Human Values 25: 107-119.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Alabama State Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity Profile. Washington, D.C.: Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/ stateprograms/fundedstates/pdf/Alabama-State-Profile.pdf.

Regan, A. and Rice, M. 2012. An exploration of alternative food desert definitions in south Dallas. Papers of the Applied Geography Conferences 35: 183-191.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012, August 13, 2013). Overweight and Obesity. Retrieved May 10, 2013, from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html#Prevalence

Reisig, V., and Hobbiss, A. 2000. Food Deserts and How to Tackle Them: A Study of One City’s Approach. Health Education Journal 59: 137-149.

Coleman-Jensen, A., Nord, M., Andrews, M., & Carlson, S. (2012). Household Food Security in the United States in 2011.

(141). Washington, D.C.

Rittel, H.W.J., and Webber, M.M. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences 4: 155-169.

Levi, J., Segal, L., & Salay, R. (2012). Bending the Obesity Cost Curve in Alabama Bending the Obesity Cost Curve. Washington, DC: Trust for America’s Health.

Food and Agriculture Organization.1996, Definition of Food Insecurity. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

Accessed September 28, 2012. http://www.fao.org/.

Hamm, M.W., and Bellows, A.C. 2003. Community Food Security and Nutrition Educators. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 35: 37-43.

Hale, K. 2011. How Information Matters: Networks and Public Policy Innovation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Kortright, R. and Wakefield, S. 2011. Edible Backyards: A Qualitative Study of Household Food Growing and Its Contributions to Food Security. Agriculture and Human Values 28: 39-53.

Stone, Deborah. 2001. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, 3/e. W.W. Norton & Company.

Lang, B.K. 2010. The Changing Face of Community-Supported Agriculture. Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment. 32: 17-26.

Ver Ploeg, M., Breneman, V., Farrigan, T., Hamrick, K., Hopkins, D., Kaufman, P., Lin, B., Nord, M., Smith, T., Williams, R., Kinnison, K., Olander, C., Singh, A., and Tuckermanty, E. 2009.

Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food—Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences: Report to Congress. Administrative Publication No. AP-036. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture.

Leete, L., Bania, N. and Sparks-Ibanga, A. 2012. Congruence and Coverage: Alternative Approaches to Identifying Urban Food

World Health Organization. 2012. Food Insecurity. World Health Organization. Accessed September 28, 2012. http://

www.who.int/trade/glossary/story028/en/.

Democratization of the Food System: Interests in a Food Policy Council in Alabama by William C. Thomas, Norbert Wilson, and Michelle R. Worosz

Sauer, A. (2012). FPC List Update Analysis. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://foodsecurity.org/programs/ food-policy-councils/.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Model-based Small Area Income & Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) for School Districts, Counties, and States. http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/ U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2009). 2007 Census of Agriculture. Washington, DC: Retrieved from http://www. agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/ Rankings_of_Market_Value/Alabama/.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2013). Food Desert Finder.

Washington, D.C.: Retrieved from http://www.ers.usda.gov/ data-products/food-access-research-atlas.aspx.

Food Systems and Supply Chains—What’s the Connection?

by Brian Gibson, Joe Hanna, and Mark Clark Dimitri, C., 1999. Integration, Coordination, and Concentration in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Industry. Economic Research Service/USDA FTS-285.

Gibson, Brian J. (2007), “Using Technology to Facilitate Traceability,” Blueprints: the Produce Professionals’ Quarterly Journal, Vol. 5, No. 4.

Golan, E., Krissoff, B., Kuchler, F., Calvin, L., Nelson, K., and Price, G., 2004. Traceability in the U.S. Food Supply: Economics Theory and Industry Studies. Economic Research Service/USDA Agricultural Report.

Karkkainen, M. 2003. “Increasing Efficiency in the Supply Chain for Short Shelf Life Goods using RFID Tagging.” International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 31, No. 10, pp 529-536.

Levinson, D.R., 2009. Traceability in the Food Supply Chain.

Office of the Inspector General, OEI-02-06-00210.

Mai, N. Bogason, S.G., Arason, S., Arnason, S.V., and Matthiasson, M.G., 2010. “Benefits of Traceability in Fish Supply Chains— Case Studies.” British Food Journal, Vol. 112, No. 9 pp 976-1002.

McLaughlin, E.W., Green, G.M., and Park, K., 1999. Changing Distribution Patterns in the U.S. Fresh Produce Industry: Mid/ Late-70s to Mid/Late-90sFood Industry Management. Cornell University, E.B. 99-03, June 1999 Porter, J.K., Baker, G.A., and Agrawal, N. 2011 “The U.S. Produce Traceability Initiative: Analysis, Evaluation, and Recommendations.” International Food and Agribusiness Review, Vol. 14(3)

Scallan E., Hoekstra, R.M., Angulo, F.J., Tauxe, R.V., Widdowson, M-A, Roy, S.L., et al. 2011. Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major Pathogens. Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal. Volume 17, Number 7—July 2011.

In Search of the Authentic: O’Neill Keeps Local Flair Alive by Karen Hunley Alonso, A., O’Neill, M.A., and Liu, Y. (2012). Food Culture in the Southern United States. Preserving Traditional Foods or Slow Death? In Spring, W. (ed.) European Culinary Tourism, FHWien University of Applied Sciences of WKW, Austria.

Hunger Solutions Institute: Connecting People and Ideas That Work

by Paula Hunker, Harriet Giles, and June Henton Food Systems for Better Nutrition., The State of Food and Agriculture 2013.US FAO. Horton, S., Shekar, M., McDonald, C., Mahal, A., Brooks, J.A. Scaling Up Nutrition: What Will it Cost?

World Bank, 2009.

Martinez, R, Fernandez, A. The cost of hunger: Social and economic impact of child undernutrition in Central America and the Dominican Republic. United Nations. 2008. Santiago Chile. Print.

The Lancet, “Maternal and Child Undernutrition,” Special Series, January, 2008.

USDA Economic Research Service. Food Security in the U.S./ Key Statistic and Graphics. http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/ food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/key-statisticsgraphics.aspx#.UmG4uKMo6e8 World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Development Programme, 2009. The Energy Access Situation in Developing Countries: A review focusing on the least developed countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. http://www.undp.org/con-

tent/undp/en/home/librarypage/environment-energy/sustainable_energy/energy-access-in-developing-countries/ Exploring the Federal Road: Historic Road Rich with Stories of Evolving Food Traditions by Kathryn Braund Bernhard, Carl, Travels through North America, During the Years 1825 and 1826, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Carey, Lea & Carey, 1828), 2:28.

Christopher, Raven M. and Gregory A. Waselkov, “Archaeological Survey of the Old Federal Road in Alabama,” Final Report prepared for the Alabama Department of Transportation [Project Number STMTE-TE09(925)]: An American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 209 Transportation Enhancement Project.

Submitted by the Center for Archaeological Studies, University of South Alabama, April 2012, pp. 40-41. Moniac’s inventory of losses appears in H. R. Doc. No. 200, 20th Cong., 1st Sess. (1828), 8-10.

Hodgson, Adam, Letters from North America Written during a Tour in the United States and Canada, 2 vols. (London: Hurst, Robinson & Co., 1824), 1:118.

Potts, William S., Diary of William S. Potts, entry for Tuesday 25, Preston-Johnston Papers, University of Kentucky Libraries.

Royall, Anne, Mrs. Royall’s Southern Tour: Second Series of the Black Book, 3 volumes (Washington, D.C., 1831), 2:147.

Waselkov. Gregory A. and Kathryn E. Holland Braund, William Bartram on the Southeastern Indians (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995), 160-61.

Visualizing Hunger: The Lessons of Käthe Kollwitz by Kathryn M. Floyd Kearns, Martha. Käthe Kollwitz: Woman and Artist. New York: Feminist Press at CUNY, 1993. Print Kollwitz, Käthe and Hans Kollwitz. Diary and Letters of Kaethe Kollwitz. Translated by Richard and Clara Winston. Evanston:

265

Northwestern University Press, 1988. Print.

Seeler, Annette. “Reflections on Käthe Kollwitz’s Self-Portraits.”

In Käthe Kollwitz: Selbstbildnisse/Self-Portraits, edited by Martin Fritsch, 9-16. Berlin and Leipzig: Käthe-Kollwitz-MuseumBerlin and EA Seemann, 2007. Print.

Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.

Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2002). Campus–community partnerships: The terms of engagement. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 503-516.

Lynton, E. A. (1995). Making the Case for Professional Service.

Forum on Faculty Roles & Rewards.

Simmons, Sherwin. “Picture as Weapon in the German Mass Media 1914-1930.” In Art and Journals on the Political Front, 1910-1940, edited by Virginia Marquardt, 142-182. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1997. Print.

Conroy, C. A., & Walker, N. J. (2000). An examination of integration of academic and vocational subject matter in the aquaculture classroom. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(2), 54-64.

Vernon, James. Hunger: A Modern History. Cambridge and London: Belknap Press, 2007. Print.

Crowson, R. L., & Goldring, E. (2009). The new localism: Re-examining issues of neighborhood and community in public education. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 108(1), 1-24.

Weinstein, Joan. The End of Expressionism: Art and the November Revolution in Germany, 1918-1919. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1990. Print.

Comprehensive Utilization of Microalgae: Functional Food and Biofuel by Yifen Wang and Douglas White

266

purposeful engagement. Educational administration quarterly, 39(4), 468-503.

Box and Draper 1987, Chen et al. 2009 , Du et al. 2000, Eshaq et al. 2011, Harun et al. 2010, Hosokawa et al. 1999, 2004., Kotake-Nara et al. 2001, Maeda et al. 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, Matsumoto et al. 2009, Nishino et al. 1992, Montgomery 1997, Nigam and Singh 2010, Rojan et al. 2011, Sangeetha et al. 2010, Sugawara et al. 2002, 2006, Wang et al. 2003, Whitaker et al.

1997, Wild et al. 2004, Woo et al. 2009 Learning and Serving: The Outdoor Classroom Project by Sean Forbes, Lisa Kensler, and Brian Parr Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. Jossey- Bass.

Blyth, D. A., Saito, R., & Berkas, T. (1997). A quantitative study of the impact of service-learning programs. Service-learning: Applications from the research, 39-56.

Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2003). Becoming a principal: Role conception, initial socialization, role-identity transformation,

Edney, K. C., & Murphy, T. H. (2010). Evaluating the mathematics achievement levels of selected groups of students participating in the state FFA agricultural mechanics career development event. In Proceedings from the Association for Career and Technical Education Research 2010 CTE Research and Professional Development Conference (pp. 1-14).

Duvall, J., & Zint, M. (2007). A review of research on the effectiveness of environmental education in promoting intergenerational learning. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(4), 14-24.

Furco, A. (2002). Is service-learning really better than community service. Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy, 1, 23.

Garcia-Ruiz, F. (2009). Creating a Schoolyard Mini-Garden.

Science Scope, 46(6), 34-37.

Hesser, G. (1995). Faculty Assessment of Student Learning: Outcomes Attributed to Service-Learning and Evidence of Changes in Faculty Attitudes About Experiential Education.

Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 33-42.

Orr, M. T., & Orphanos, S. (2011). How graduate-level preparation influences the effectiveness of school leaders: A comparison of the outcomes of exemplary and conventional leadership preparation programs for principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 18-70.

Parnell, D. (1996). Cerebral Context. Vocational Education Journal, 71(3), 18-21.

Parr, B. A., Edwards, M. C., & Leising, J. G. (2006). Effects of a math-enhanced curriculum and instructional approach on the mathematics achievement of agricultural power and technology students: An experimental study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(3), 81.

Parr, B. A., Edwards, M. C., & Leising, J. G. (2008). Does a curriculum integration intervention to improve the mathematics achievement of students diminish their acquisition of technical competence? An experimental study in agricultural mechanics.

Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(1), 61.

Parr, B., Edwards, M. C., & Leising, J. G. (2009). Selected effects of a curriculum integration intervention on the mathematics performance of secondary students enrolled in an agricultural power and technology course: An experimental study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 50(1), 57-69.

Prentice, M., & Garcia, R. M. (2000). Service learning: The next generation in education. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 24(1), 19-26.

Robinson, O’Brien, Story, & Heim (2009). Impact of gardenbased youth nutritionintervention programs: A review. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109, 2, 273-280. DOI:

10.1016/j.jada.2008.10.051) Waterman, A. S. (Ed.). (1997). Service-learning: Applications from the research. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Weigert, K. M. (1998). Academic service learning: Its meaning and relevance. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1998(73), 3-10.

Williams, D. R. (2013). Impact of garden-based learning on academic outcomes in schools: Synthesis of research between 1990 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 83, 2, 211-235.

DOI: 10.3102/0034654313475824 Food and Health: Perspectives from Nursing by Bonnie Sanderson Estruch, R. et al. (2013). Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean Diet. New England Journal of Medicine.

Ogden, C.L., Carroll, M.D., Kit, B.K., Flegal, K.M. (2012) Prevalence of obesity in the United States, 2009â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2010. NCHS data brief, no 82. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

World Health Organization (WHO). Ten facts on obesity.

Retrieved from http://www.who.int/features/factfiles/obesity/ en/index.html.

Healthy Snacking Recommendations: Snacking Benefits for Older Adults by Claire A. Zizza Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The State of Aging and Health in America 2013. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013.

Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary

of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, May 2010.

Johnson, G. H., Anderson, G. H. Snacking definitions: impact on interpretation of the literature and dietary recommendations.

Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2010; 50(9):848-71.

McCrory, M.A., Howarth, N.C., Roberts, S.B., Huang, T.T. Eating frequency and energy regulation in free-living adults consuming self-selected diets. J Nutr 2011; 141(1):148-53.

represents a cause for concern! Prev Med 2001; 32(4):303-10.

Zizza, C., Tayie, F. A., Lino M. Benefits of snacking in older Americans. J Am Diet Assoc 2007; 107(5):800-6.

Xu, B., Yu, G. P., Zizza, C. A., Liu, H., Zhao, L. Snacking may improve physical function among older Americans. J Nutr Health Aging 2013; 17(4):393-7.

Mesas, A.E., Munoz-Pareja, M., Lopez-Garcia, E., RodriguezArtalejo, F. Selected eating behaviours and excess body weight: a systematic review. Obes Rev 2012; 13(2):106-35.

Miller, R., Benelam, B., Stanner, S., Buttriss, J. Is snacking good or bad for health: An overview. Nutrition Bulletin 2013; 38(3):302-322.

Montero-Odasso, M., Schapira, M., Varela, C., Pitteri, C., Soriano, E. R., Kaplan, R. et al. Gait velocity in senior people.

An easy test for detecting mobility impairment in community elderly. J Nutr Health Aging 2004; 8(5):340-3.

Palmer, M. A., Capra, S., Baines, S. K. Association between eating frequency, weight, and health. Nutr Rev 2009; 67(7):379-90.

Palmer, M. A., Capra S., Baines, S. K. To snack or not to snack: What should we advise for weight management? Nutrition & Dietetics 2011; 68(1):60-64.

Studenski, S., Perera, S., Wallace, D., Chandler, J. M., Duncan, P. W., Rooney, E. et al. Physical performance measures in the clinical setting. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51(3):314-22.

Wernette, C. M., White, B. D., Zizza, C. Signaling proteins that influence energy intake may affect unintentional weight loss in elderly persons. J Am Diet Assoc 2011; 111(6):864-73.

Zizza, C., Siega-Riz, A. M., Popkin, B. M. Significant increase in young adultsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; snacking between1977-1978 and 1994-1996

267

Contributor Biographies Cova Arias is a professor in the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences at Auburn University and a core faculty member of the multidisciplinary Auburn University Food Systems Institute, which recently was awarded an FDA grant to help develop a food safety training program for food inspectors.

Leah Rawls Atkins is an award-winning writer and historian. She has written widely on Alabama 268 history and culture and is currently at work on a book about Sedgefields Plantation in Union Springs, Alabama.

Elena Barthel is an assistant professor at the College of Architecture, Design and Construction’s Rural Studio, where she oversees the third-year design studio charged with designing the Rural Studio farm. Since 2010 she has actively contributed to the Rural Studio’s integration of design, build, and outreach through projects that build an ethic of community engagement and service.

Sarge Bilgili is professor and Extension specialist in the Department of Poultry Science at Auburn

University. He has served as the president of the Poultry Science Association and Southern Poultry Science Society, as well as chairman of the National Chicken Council Animal Welfare Scientific Advisory Committee.

Christy Bratcher is an associate professor in the Department of Animal Sciences. She has won several awards for her teaching and research, most recently the American Meat Science Association Distinguished Achievement Award in 2013.

Kathryn H. Braund is the Hollifield Professor of Southern History for the Department of History.

She has authored, co-authored, and edited a number of publications, including her first book, Deerskins and Duffels: The Creek Indian Trade with Anglo-America, 1685-1815.

Charles Chen is an associate professor at the Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences. He has authored or co-authored over 50 articles in refereed journals and six book chapters.

He also owned two patents and released three

varieties, including the 2012-released “AU-1101” peanut variety.

Bryan Chin is McWane Professor in Materials Engineering in the Samuel Ginn College of Engineering and director of the Materials Research and Education Center at Auburn University.

Mark Clark serves as a management scientist in the Auburn Technical Assistance Center and as a visiting assistant professor in the Aviation and Supply Chain Management Department. For the last six years, he has focused primarily on implementing the six sigma process-improvement methodology in manufacturing companies located in Alabama.

David Cline is an Extension aquaculturist with the Alabama Cooperative Extension System and works in the area of aquaculture management, color imaging systems, and Extension/adult education.

He provides primary technical and marketing assistance to aquaculture producers in east and north Alabama and in surrounding states.

Elina Coneva is an associate professor in the Department of Horticulture and a specialist for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System. Her research and Extension programs are designed to address production constraints of traditionally grown fruit crops such as peaches and investigate the feasibility of growing an array of alternative or underutilized fruit crops, including muscadine and bunch grapes, blueberries, blackberries, Asian pears, and bananas.

Corey Courtwright holds a doctorate and a master’s degree in aquaculture, both from Auburn University. He spent six years doing Christian community development work with Lasting Harvest International in Panama, Ecuador, and Haiti.

His research interests include catfish, tilapia, and Australian red claw crawfish production as well as sustainable aquaculture development.

Keith Cummins is a professor emeritus in the Department of Animal Sciences. His research interests revolve around protein nutrition and the hormones that control metabolism in both dairy cattle and dogs.

Phat Dang is a research biochemist/molecular biologist at the National Peanut Research Laboratory, Dawson, Georgia. He is also an affiliate associate professor with Auburn.

William Deutsch is a research fellow emeritus and consultant for the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences. He is a founding director of Alabama Water Watch (AWW), a community-based water monitoring and watershed stewardship program. He also directs the Global Water Watch program.

Stephen S. Ditchkoff is an associate professor of wildlife ecology and management in the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, and he manages the Auburn University Deer Lab. Kathryn Floyd is an assistant professor in the Department of Art, teaching courses in modern and contemporary art, as well as in the history of the arts of Africa and the U.S. In 2011, she received the Auburn University SGA Outstanding Faculty Member Award for the College of Liberal Arts.

Sean Forbes is an associate professor in the Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology Department in the College of Education. His research interests include the cognitive, physical, and socio-emotional development of adolescents and their relationship to educational experiences.

Brian Gibson is the Wilson Family Professor in the Aviation and Supply Chain Management

Department. He is the recipient of multiple College of Business awards, including the 2004 Research Award, the 2004 MBA Teaching Award, the 2002 McCartney Teaching Award, and the 2002 Outreach Award. He is active in supply chain management research and participates in multiple executive education, corporate training, and consulting projects.

Harriet Giles serves as director of external relations for the College of Human Sciences and as managing director of the Auburn University International Hunger Institute (IHI).

Bill Goff is a professor emeritus in the Department 269 of Horticulture, having retired in December 2013 after 31 years with the university, most recently as Nunn Bond Endowed Professor and Extension pecan specialist. The Alabama Pecan Growers Association named him Alabama Pecan Grower of the Year in 2010. He is actively engaged in promotion of pecans to overseas markets, especially to China.

Deacue Fields is an economist for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES) and assistant professor in the agricultural economics and rural sociology department in the College of Agriculture. In 2004, he won the College of

Agriculture’s Outstanding Faculty Member award.

His research focus areas are economics, marketing, and business management in horticulture.

Kathleen Hale is the director of the Master of Public Administration program and an associate professor in the Department of Political Science. She is the 2011 recipient of the Award for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Community and Civic Engagement from the College of Liberal Arts. Her book How Information Matters: Networks and Public Policy Innovation (Georgetown University Press 2011) was named “best book” by the Academy of Management.

270

Joe Hanna is associate dean of research and outreach and Regions Bank professor of Supply Chain Management in the College of Business. He has authored or co-authored numerous journal articles on these topics as well as a logistics textbook and has participated in government-funded transportation research.

Terry Hanson is an associate professor and Extension specialist in the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences and is also a co-director of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Business Institute.

Daniel Henry is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology in the College of Education. He has published scholarly articles and book chapters focusing on evaluation and qualitative research, and his poetry has appeared in a number of journals online and on paper.

Zac Henson is an assistant adjunct professor of Southern studies for the University of Mississippi.

He is also director of the Magic City Agriculture Project, a Birmingham, Alabama-based nonprofit whose mission is to “improve environmental, social and economic conditions” through urban agriculture. He holds a master’s degree from Auburn.

June Henton is dean of the College of Human Sciences at Auburn University.

Joseph Hess is an associate professor in the Department of Poultry Science and an Extension specialist. He is a member of the Poultry Science Association, the Southern Poultry Science Society, and the Alabama Poultry and Egg Association, and he works closely with the Alabama Feed and Grain Association.

Paula Hunker is the director of strategy and policy for the Hunger Solutions Institute at Auburn University. She first came to Auburn as senior

policy adviser, representing the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) in its fight against hunger.

John Jensen is a professor emeritus in the Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures.

He currently serves as the interim director of the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences.

Njogu Kahare is a senior project officer with the Green Belt Movement in Nairobi, Kenya.

Bernard Kaltenboeck is a professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine. In addition to several national honors for publications resulting from his doctoral research, he received the Distinguished Dissertation Award for 1991 from LSU for his dissertation. After a two-year tenure at Veterinary Medical University in Vienna, Austria, he joined the faculty at Auburn University in 1994.

Joseph Kemble is a professor in the Department of Horticulture and vegetable specialist for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System. His research and extension activities surround olericulture—the production of vegetable crops—in Alabama. He is currently working on developing a sensor that can distinguish maturity and ripeness in watermelon.

Lisa Kensler is an associate professor for the Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology Department in the College of Education. Her research interests focus on the leadership and learning necessary to transform PK-12 schools into sustainable, healthy, highperforming systems.

David J. Ketchen, Jr. is a Lowder Eminent Scholar and professor of management for the Department of Management in the College of Business. He also currently serves as director of the Lowder Center for Family Business and Entrepreneurship at Auburn University. Ketchen has published six books and more than 100 articles in scholarly journals.

Marshall Lamb is a supervisory research food technologist and the research leader and location coordinator of the National Peanut Research Laboratory (NPRL), Dawson, Georgia. He is also an affiliate professor with Auburn.

Shaoyang Liu is an assistant professor of chemistry in the Department of Chemistry and Physics at Troy University. Previously, he worked as a visiting scholar and research fellow in the Auburn University Department of Biosystems Engineering for five years.

Ken Macklin is an associate professor in the Department of Poultry Science and a specialist for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System.

His focus areas are poultry health, environmental issues, and biosecurity. Currently, his research involves determining the efficacy of various feed additives in reducing foodborne bacteria and pathogens in poultry.

Chad H. Newbolt is a research associate in the School of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences. He has worked on research projects focused on numerous wildlife species in the U.S. and abroad, ranging from white-tailed deer in Alabama to Eurasian wild boar in Morocco.

Robert A. Norton is a professor and veterinary microbiologist in the Department of Poultry Science. He is currently the director of Auburn Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Open Source Intelligence Lab and faculty liaison to the Auburn Cyber Initiative.

Sondra M. Parmer is an Extension specialist in Family and Consumer Sciences and serves as the project manager for the Nutrition Education Program.

Brian Parr is an associate professor and the program coordinator of Agriscience Education in the Department of Curriculum and Teaching in

the College of Education. His research focuses on the exploration of how agricultural education may serve as the context for the teaching and learning of other subjects, such as math, science, and reading.

Dan Petrolia is an associate professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at Mississippi State University. His research focuses on using survey methods to analyze willingness to pay for non-market goods such as coastal wetlands and ecosystem services and market goods such as alternative fuels and Gulf oysters.

Stephen Pierce is a 2013 graduate of Auburn University. He currently pursues his interest in food at Acre in Auburn.

Frost Rollins is a graduate research assistant in the Department of Political Science, where she is pursuing a doctorate in public administration and public policy. She is also an adjunct professor in the AU College of Architecture Design and Construction, where she teaches a course on sustainable design and delivery.

Bonnie Sanderson is an associate professor in the School of Nursing. She has authored numerous peer-reviewed publications in the field. Her research focus is cardiac rehabilitation with a

271

specific interest in behavior change interventions and promotion of physical activity in high-risk populations.

Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES).

Her interests include infant mortality, breastfeeding, prenatal nutrition, and infant health in general.

years has focused on mucosal immune responses in the respiratory tract of chickens to bacterial and viral pathogens and viral vectors.

Mark D. Smith is an Extension specialist with the Alabama Cooperative Extension System and associate professor in the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences. His Extension and research activities focus primarily on wild pig damage management and private lands habitat development for game and non-game wildlife.

LaDon Swann is director of the Mississippi– Alabama Sea Grant Consortium (MASGC) and director of Auburn University’s marine programs.

He is responsible for implementing practical solutions to coastal issues through competitive research, graduate student training, and outreach and K-12 education in Alabama and Mississippi.

Edgar L. Vinson is a research associate in the Department of Horticulture at Auburn University.

Iryna Sorokulova, a professor of microbiology, joined the College of Veterinary Medicine in 2002.

Her research focuses on the development of new 272 microbial approaches for detection and control of pathogens. She is the recipient of the Ukraine State Prize in Science and Technology.

James (Jay) Spiers is an assistant professor in the Department of Horticulture. His research focuses on sustainable fruit crop production systems and includes work with satsuma mandarin, blueberry, kiwifruit, blackberry, persimmon, and pomegranate. He also teaches undergraduate and graduate classes pertaining to fruit production.

Barbara Struempler is a professor in the College of Human Sciences and a nutritionist with the

William Thomas is the public policy and research associate at the Meals On Wheels Association of America. He received a master’s in agricultural economics in May 2013 from Auburn University, where his work focused on food policy and access.

Beth Walton is the MarketMaker outreach coordinator for Alabama. She works primarily with the seafood and charter boat industries along the coast in conjunction with the Mississippi–Alabama Sea Grant Consortium and the Auburn University Marine Extension and Research Center.

Kate Thornton is the director of hunger and sustainability initiatives in the College of Human Sciences. She also works with other faculty to help further Auburn’s efforts in solving these challenges through a program called the Global Challenge Fellows.

Bill Walton is an assistant professor in the School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences and a marine extension specialist for the Alabama Cooperative Extension System. Working along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico at Auburn University’s Shellfish Lab (Dauphin Island, AL), he conducts applied research with local shellfish farmers, shellfishermen (commercial and recreational), and national and local organizations.

Frederik W. van Ginkel is an associate professor in the Department of Pathobiology in the College of Veterinary Medicine. He came to Auburn in 2004, where he is active in training graduate and professional students. His research in the last few

Yifen Wang is an associate professor in the Department of Biosystems Engineering. He has engaged in research on fisheries processing since 1990, when he started working with the Chinese Academy of Fisheries Science.

David Weaver is a professor of plant breeding in the Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences. He was honored with the Deanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Award for Advising Excellence in 2010 and named a fellow by the American Society of Agronomy in 2009, among many other awards.

Douglas White is an associate professor in the Department of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Hospitality Management. He has experience with the techniques involved in performing an energy balance study and has published the results of dietary manipulations on energy balance in the Journal of Nutrition.

Norbert L. Wilson is an associate professor of agricultural economics in the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.

He is also a core faculty member of the Auburn University Food Systems Institute and is affiliated with the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station.

Michelle Worosz is an associate professor of rural sociology in the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. She is also a core faculty member of the Auburn University Food Systems Institute and is affiliated with the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Her research focuses on agrifood governance, small-scale supply chains, and food security.

Claire A. Zizza is an associate professor of nutrition and dietetics in the College of Human Sciences. Her research interests include nutritional epidemiology focused on the prevention, treatment, and consequences of obesity; as well as dietary patterns examined on a national level in the U.S. and the Mediterranean area.

273

Auburn Speaks is an annual publication on Auburn University research targeting issues that impact life and work in our state and beyond. The third edition of Auburn Speaks addresses food systems, showcasing the interconnectedness of food-related issues and challenges and the interdependence of disciplines and approaches in the search for solutions and improvements. For additional content and information about Auburn Speaks, visit www.auburn.edu/auburnspeaks.

“As a land-grant institution, Auburn University has a long history of doing practical research and communicating the results of that research to the public. Over its 150-plus years, few areas have received more extensive or sustained attention than food.”

Jay Gogue, President

“The world faces a challenge: the difficulty of feeding the 7 billion people who live on earth right now. If estimations are correct and another 2 to 3 billion people are added by 2050, ‘challenge’ could well become ‘crisis.’ If we are to feed, clothe, shelter, and fuel an extra 2 billion hungry souls–and respond to the needs of the approximately 2 billion moving into the middle class—can we do it simply by expanding our farms? Not likely.”

John Jensen, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences

Auburn University