Front Range Seed Analysts
1993 Seed Forum Volume 7 Number 2
THOUGHTS FROM THE FRONT RANGE: by Jim Bruce
Recently, as I undertook spring cleaning, I came across boxes of old issues of the AOSA Proceedings. As I searched through the boxes I found myself reading and reviewing many of the proceedings. A bit of nostalgia set in as I thought of the early pioneers of seed testing and the contributions they made. With the AOSA/SCST meetings fast approaching, I think often of what has been accomplished by the two organizations and the work we still have ahead of us.
The early analysts gave us the "art and practicality" of seed testing. They began to merge the practical and the science of testing seeds. Many of the early Proceedings revolve around methods of purity and germination, materials used and standard usage, identification of seeds, equipment for analysis, pathology and sanitation in germination testing, dormancy questions, seed legislation, and standardization of results. Most of the articles are of a practical nature, written by analysts, working day in and day out with seeds and living the "art" of seed testing. The articles found in the Proceedings are a storehouse of information which many analysts are unaware of.
Today the emphasis in seed testing has become "scientific". This can be seen by the articles and research papers presented in the recent years' AOSA Proceedings. But something is lacking and I wonder what has happened to the "art and practicality" of seed testing? There comes to mind the very real need for updated identification drawings and plates. Crop and weed species evolve over the years and there is the need, for instance, to illustrate the Asteraceae family. There is a continuing need f or us to communicate new methods and equipment devised for specialized seeds, such as the rangegrasses. Something is lacking in the newer issues of the Proceedings, which make the older issues a joy to read and informative for the "working analyst". (Editors note: Are we all too busy to write the articles and share the practical day to day information that is unique to each analyst? Was there more time in the past or do we just not make the time today?)
As always there are many issues to be discussed at this years AOAS/SCST Annual Meeting. One issue that seems to be in the forefront is analysts ethics. All analysts recognize that the service which we provide to the seed industry is only as good as the quality of the analyst and laboratory. When our services are of high quality, the seed trade has confidence in our analysis reports. It is of utmost importance that we deliver a service which the seedsmen and consumers trust. From recent discussions with our local seedsmen, I find that here is a growing awareness that there is deviation from the standardized rules for seed testing. They are aware of the fact that a few labs take shortcuts and deviate from the rules/procedures. This has led to problems in the selling, shipping, and buying of seed and results in an overall lack of confidence. Progress has been made in this area but we need to address this problem further. Possibly by drafting ethical rules and procedures (such as blind testing) for checking the adherence to the rules and quality of work? As the old expression states, "one bad apple spoils the bunch". (Editors note: "One moldy dead seed can spoil the test".) This is an issue which affects all analysts and I hope that we can address this issue and achieve lasting effects. The AOSA/SCST has a proud history of seed testing much work has been performed over the years to instill confidence in test results. Let's confront this problem now and gain back the confidence of the industry which we serve.