Jun 18, 2026
Version 2
Collaborative Evaluation Protocol for Creole Tomatoes in Participatory Breeding Programs V.2
- Almendra Cremaschi1,2,3,
- Maria Laura Bravo4,3,
- Malena Giai5
- 1CONICET;
- 2CENIT-EEyN-UNSAM;
- 3Bioleft;
- 4FCAyF UNLP;
- 5UBA, Bioleft
- Bioleft
Protocol Citation: Almendra Cremaschi, Maria Laura Bravo, Malena Giai 2026. Collaborative Evaluation Protocol for Creole Tomatoes in Participatory Breeding Programs. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.rm7vzqrq5vx1/v2Version created by Almendra Cremaschi
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: May 26, 2026
Last Modified: June 18, 2026
Protocol Integer ID: 317951
Keywords: Participatory plant breeding, Creole tomatoes, Agroecology, Collaborative evaluation, Seed sovereignty, Citizen science, Open source seeds, Phenotypic characterization, Sensory evaluation, Farmer-led research, collaborative evaluation protocol for cr..., evaluation of creole tomato variety, participatory tomato breeding in argenti..., participatory tomato breeding, creole tomato variety, creole tomato, assessments of flavor, tomato accession, agronomic evaluation, participatory breeding programs this pro..., participatory breeding program, tasting event, collaborative evaluation, collaborative evaluation protocol, standardized framework for the collabora..., harvest, crop cycle, agroecological system, sensory evaluation, strengthening farmer autonomy, culminate in sensory evaluation, evaluation, farmer autonomy, involving farmer, scientific descriptors with trait, gardener, flavor, participatory selection, observations with user experience, complementary dimensions of evaluation, trait, aroma, creole tomato varieties in participatory breeding progra
Funders Acknowledgements:
The Conservation, Food and Health Foundation
Grant ID: Bioleft: a collaborative, open source seed breeding initiative for sustainable agriculture.
University of San Martín
Grant ID: UNSAM Investiga
Abstract
This protocol provides a structured and flexible framework for the collaborative evaluation of Creole tomato varieties in participatory breeding programs. It explains how to organize decentralized tomato trials, collect agronomic and sensory observations, and integrate results to support collective selection, learning, and future breeding decisions.
Designed for agroecological, household garden, community garden, and small-scale production contexts, the protocol supports the recovery, evaluation, circulation, and improvement of tomato diversity. It helps seed communities coordinate shared observation, care, documentation, and reflection across different participants, places, and growing conditions.
Attachments
Image Attribution
Manuel Correa, Sabrina Rendón, Karina Schofield, Patricio Devoto, Norma Quinteros, Ailín Fernández, Yael Tachdjian, and Sofía Casals.
Guidelines
Purpose
This protocol supports the recovery, evaluation, circulation, and improvement of tomato diversity in participatory breeding programs. It recognizes that evaluation is shaped not only by people, but also by tomato plants, varieties, seeds, places, and growing conditions.
Farmers, gardeners, facilitators, researchers, consumers, plants, seeds, and places all contribute to the process through care, observation, growth, adaptation, preference, productivity, vulnerability, and response to specific environments. Making these relationships visible helps strengthen more diverse, situated, and collectively governed seed systems.
The protocol also treats protocols as living agreements: shared tools that make coordination possible across distributed seed communities while remaining open to revision through experience, community input, and reflection.
In practical terms, this protocol helps seed communities define trial objectives, select and distribute tomato accessions, accompany participants, record field observations, evaluate sensory qualities, integrate agronomic and experiential data, and use results for collective learning and future breeding cycles.
Guidelines
Use these guidelines to put the protocol into practice, including trial setup, participant accompaniment, data collection, and collective analysis.
Support seed communities in organizing shared processes of observation, care, and learning around Creole tomato varieties. Within these communities, facilitators help create the conditions for participants, seeds, plants, and places to contribute to the evaluation process.
Accompany participants throughout the crop cycle by keeping communication spaces open, clarifying how to use the observation tools, and encouraging regular sharing of observations, questions, and experiences.
Follow the crop cycle when collecting observations. Record data at key phenological stages and complement these records with photographs, collective reflection, and participant experiences.
At the end of the cycle, bring together and review the collected observations, including sensory evaluation results when applicable. Discuss the results collectively to support shared interpretation, participant feedback, and future decisions.
While the protocol allows contextual adaptation, maintain the core structure of observations, variables, and comparative logic. This helps preserve data consistency while allowing learning to emerge across participants, places, and growing cycles.
Glossary
Accession: A distinct seed lot with a documented origin, identity, and multiplication history. In this protocol, accessions may be genetically heterogeneous and are evaluated under real farming or gardening conditions. For ease of communication with participants, accessions are hereafter referred to as “varieties.” The use of this term does not imply genetic uniformity or formal registration.
Variety: A term commonly used by farmers and gardeners to refer to a recognizable type of tomato based on agronomic, morphological, and sensory characteristics. In this protocol, “variety” is used as a practical term to describe tomato accessions under evaluation. It does not imply genetic uniformity, varietal fixation, or legal registration.
Creole / Heirloom varieties: populations that were historically cultivated and adapted in Argentina over multiple generations, shaped by local agroecological conditions, culinary practices, and selection criteria.
Phenological Stage: A distinct phase in the plant life cycle, such as germination, vegetative growth, flowering, fruiting, or harvest. Observations in this protocol are organized by phenological stages to ensure consistency and comparability across participants and environments.
Target Product Profile (TPP): A structured description of the desired characteristics of a crop or variety, defined collaboratively by stakeholders.
Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB): An approach to plant breeding in which farmers, gardeners, researchers, and other actors collaboratively evaluate, select, and improve plant materials. Decision-making is shared, and selection is carried out under real growing conditions, integrating scientific criteria with farmer knowledge and preferences.
Selection: The process by which participants identify preferred plants or accessions based on observed performance and preferences. In this protocol, selection is collective, iterative, and context-dependent, and does not aim at immediate varietal fixation.
On-Farm Trial: An evaluation conducted in real farming or gardening conditions rather than in controlled experimental stations. On-farm trials allow accessions to be tested under diverse environments and management practices, reflecting real-world performance.
Open-Source Seeds: Seeds shared under a legal and ethical framework that guarantees their free use, reproduction, exchange, and further improvement, while preventing their appropriation through exclusive intellectual property rights. A template of the agreement is available on Bioleft’s webpage (https://www.bioleft.org/en/acuerdo-bioleft-2/)
Participants: Farmers and gardeners who cultivate the tomato accessions under their usual growing conditions, record observations using the Observation Template, and share experiences, questions, and reflections throughout the trial.
Breeders: Researchers or technical specialists who contribute expertise to trial design, trait evaluation, data interpretation, and the connection between participant observations and broader breeding, agroecological, or conservation goals.
Facilitators: People or teams who accompany the participatory evaluation process by preparing materials, supporting participants, keeping communication spaces open, and helping bring together observations, photographs, sensory impressions, and reflections for collective interpretation.
Seed Communities: The people, organizations, plants, seeds, places, and relationships that sustain collective seed work. In this protocol, seed communities may include farmers, gardeners, seed savers, facilitators, breeders, researchers, consumers, community organizations, and the tomato varieties themselves as living participants in the evaluation process.
Communication, Mutual Support, and Safeguarding
Use community care and safeguarding practices to protect the integrity of the participatory evaluation process, the seed materials, and the relationships that sustain the work. This protocol does not rely on surveillance or punitive monitoring. Instead, it encourages mutual accountability, transparency, and respectful documentation of conflicts or concerns.
When issues arise—such as seed misidentification, unauthorized circulation of materials, inappropriate use of participant information, lack of attribution, harmful communication, or disagreement about how results, stories, images, or seeds should be shared—document them carefully and address them through dialogue whenever possible.
Use light-touch verification practices to protect traceability and trust, such as confirming seed reception, maintaining accession codes, reviewing observations for consistency, documenting seed provenance, and working through trusted local networks. These practices are intended to care for the seed commons, not to control participants.
| Step | Checkpoint | Criteria | Suggested Support Response | |
| Participant recruitment | Participants meet selection criteria and confirm commitment. | Selected participants complete registration and review the participation agreement before receiving seeds. | Invite reserve participants when needed or adjust recruitment before seed distribution. | |
| Diversity and representation | Participant cohort reflects diverse growing contexts and user profiles. | No relevant production context is systematically excluded without justification. | Adjust the recruitment strategy or invite additional participants from underrepresented contexts. | |
| Communication readiness | Participants receive onboarding and access support channels. | Participants join the agreed communication space and receive trial materials. | Follow up individually and provide alternative communication mechanisms when needed. | |
| Consent and ethics | Consent and participation agreement are completed. | Documentation is completed before seed distribution. | Postpone seed distribution until documentation is complete. | |
| Data registration | Participant information is correctly entered in observation tools. | No duplicate IDs; required metadata are completed. | Review records, correct errors, and complete missing fields. | |
| Participation continuity | Participants remain active throughout the cycle. | Participation remains sufficient for the campaign objectives. | Increase reminders and support; document attrition and its possible effects on interpretation. | |
| Observation completion | Core observations are recorded across stages. | Sufficient information is available for analysis. | Follow up with participants; document incomplete observations and decide collectively whether they can be used. | |
| Sensory evaluation | Sensory information is collected according to the protocol design. | Participant sensory evaluation is completed; consumer evaluation is implemented when applicable. | Extend tasting activities when feasible or document why they were not implemented. | |
| Data consolidation and feedback | Results are integrated and returned to participants. | Feedback activities are conducted after campaign completion. | Organize additional feedback spaces or share results through accessib |
Implementation Support Checkpoints for Decentralized Trials
Version Control and Document History
This document is intended to function as a living and evolving tool that will be adapted and improved through iterative implementation cycles. It will be periodically reviewed and revised based on implementation experience, participant feedback, and external methodological review. Additional comments and suggestions are welcome and may be incorporated into future versions during the next scheduled review cycle.
| Effective Date | Version # | Description | Prepared By | External Review | Next Review Expected | |
| 25 May 2026 | 20260525 | Initial protocol version prepared based on Bioleft participatory tomato breeding experience and protocol development process. | Bioleft team | Adam Alexander (Garden Organic; the UK); Florencia Arancibia (CENIT–EEyN–UNSAM; Argentina); Kate Genevieve (Astro Ecologies Institute; Aotearoa/New Zealand); Ileana Iocola (CREA-AA; Italy); and Dr. Rodel G. Maghirang (Institute of Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and Food Science, University of the Philippines Los Baños; the Philippines). | June 2027 |
Version Control and Document History Chart
Materials
The following materials are required or recommended for implementing the participatory tomato evaluation protocol. They are intentionally limited to support feasibility across agroecological, household garden, community garden, and small-scale production contexts.
Seeds and Documentation
Seed package: Three tomato accessions per participant, clearly labeled and packaged separately. Seed quantities should be sufficient to establish at least 6–8 plants per accession.
Observation Template: Excel-based spreadsheet used to record agronomic, phenological, management, post-harvest, and sensory observations throughout the crop cycle.
Instruction sheet: Printed or digital guide summarizing the key steps of the protocol, basic cultivation guidance, and variables to be observed.
Field Tools and Supplies
Hand tools: Basic tools for soil preparation, transplanting, and crop maintenance, such as a trowel, hoe, or equivalent tools.
Stakes and ties: Materials for plant support, when applicable.
Watering equipment: Equipment used according to local practices, such as a watering can, hose, or drip irrigation system.
Protective gloves: Optional, for manual field or garden work.
Compost or organic inputs: Optional, when these are part of the grower’s usual management practices.
Observation and Data Collection Tools
Notebook or smartphone: For additional field notes and contextual observations.
Camera or smartphone with camera: For documenting plant development, fruit characteristics, management practices, stress situations, or unexpected events.
Computer or device with spreadsheet software: For completing the Observation Template, using Microsoft Excel, LibreOffice Calc, or equivalent software.
Communication and Support
Communication platform: Use the communication platform selected for the trial, such as Signal, WhatsApp, Telegram, email, or SMS, depending on participant access, privacy needs, and local context.
Internet access: Recommended for downloading materials, participating in virtual activities, communicating with the group, and submitting completed Observation Templates.
Video-conferencing platform: Optional but recommended for training webinars, coordination meetings, and end-of-cycle feedback or reflection sessions.
Safety warnings
To ensure the accuracy, consistency, and collaborative integrity of the trial, the following warnings and considerations must be taken into account:
Trial Management
- Avoidance of Preferential Care: No accession should receive special treatment unless it reflects the grower’s standard practices. Trials aim to evaluate varietal performance under real-life cultivation conditions.
- Edge Effects: Environmental factors such as shade, wind exposure, or runoff may affect plants located at plot edges. While these variations are difficult to eliminate, they should be noted when relevant to interpret results accurately.
Data Collection
- Adherence to Timing: Observations should be made at or near the phenological stages defined in the protocol (e.g., flowering, fruit setting, ripening). Deviations may reduce the reliability of collected data.
Environmental Risks
- Extreme Weather Events: Incidents such as drought, frost, hailstorms, or excessive heat must be recorded and shared with coordinators to provide context for trial results.
- Pest and Disease Outbreaks: Any serious incidence of pests or diseases affecting the trial should be documented. Shared observations can support collective learning and identify broader trends across regions.
Material Handling and Documentation
- Seed Integrity: Seeds from different accessions must remain clearly labeled and stored separately throughout the process to prevent cross-contamination.
- Photographic Records: Photographs intended to document plant development or fruit characteristics should be clearly linked to the corresponding accession to avoid confusion.
- Loss or Misidentification: Any loss or mislabeling of seeds, plants, or records should be reported promptly to the team to determine appropriate steps.
Communication and Troubleshooting
- Documentation of Irregularities: Any deviation from the protocol—including data loss, failed germination, or partial trials—should be reported to contribute to the improvement of the process.
- Use of Support Channels: the selected communication space and scheduled workshops are available for technical support and peer exchange. Active engagement is encouraged to strengthen the learning process and address shared challenges.
Ethics statement
This protocol involves human participants contributing observational data, experiential knowledge, and optional photographic records within the framework of participatory plant breeding and citizen science. No experiments involving animals are conducted as part of this protocol.
Ethical considerations are addressed through an informed consent form that ensures voluntary participation, clarity regarding data use, respect for privacy, and appropriate recognition of contributions. Data are collected and managed in accordance with principles of responsible research and open science. Where applicable, the protocol follows institutional and national guidelines for research involving human participants. Any collective activities, such as sensory evaluations, are conducted in non-invasive settings and do not pose risks beyond everyday food consumption.
The protocol is also guided by a commitment to non-extractive and respectful collaboration. Participants’ knowledge, stories, seed practices, culinary memories, and intergenerational experiences should not be treated merely as data to be collected, but as situated contributions that require care, consent, contextual understanding, and appropriate recognition. When Indigenous, local, or intergenerational knowledge is shared, seed communities should discuss how that knowledge may be documented, circulated, attributed, protected, or kept private. The process should support reciprocity, collective learning, and community benefit, rather than one-way extraction of information.
Informed Consent Form.docx19.3KB Before start
Understand the Protocol
Before starting any activities, read the full protocol from beginning to end, including the abstract, purpose, guidelines, glossary, and methodological sections.
Indicative Durations
Use the durations indicated for each phase as approximate maximum timeframes under typical conditions. Actual timing may vary depending on local climate, management practices, accession characteristics, participant availability, and unforeseen events.
Phases may overlap, begin earlier, or finish sooner without compromising the trial, as long as observations are recorded as close as possible to the defined phenological stages.
Document and discuss any adaptations collectively so they can inform future selection, breeding, or protocol revision cycles.
Observation Tool and Data Recording Principles
Use an individual copy of the standardized CSV-based Observation Template for each participant. The template is structured into sheets corresponding to the main phenological and management phases of the protocol, including sowing and emergence, transplanting, growth and development, fruiting, harvest and post-harvest, and sensory evaluation.
Record observations directly in the relevant sheet as the crop cycle progresses. Enter observations at, or as close as possible to, the phenological stages defined in this protocol. Recording observations much earlier or later than the indicated stages may reduce comparability and affect interpretation.
Save the file frequently and keep a local backup. Share any difficulties or uncertainties with the facilitation team or through the agreed communication space.
Do not modify, edit, or overwrite the final consolidation sheet of the Observation Template. This sheet automatically brings together information from the previous sheets through predefined formulas and linkages.
Enter or edit information only in the designated data-entry sheets. If errors or inconsistencies appear in the consolidated view, correct them in the corresponding original sheet, not in the consolidation sheet.
Consistent Rankings and Scoring
Use comparative ranking or rating scales as relative evaluations across the accessions grown by the same participant.
Photographic Records
Take and share photographs of plants, fruits, and relevant management or stress situations throughout the growing cycle when possible.
Protocol Attachments and Supporting Materials
The protocol includes the following attachments:
- Observation Template
- Informed Consent Form
- Participant Sign-Up Form
- Campaign Results Report
Understand the protocol structure
Use this protocol as a guide for organizing a participatory tomato evaluation from trial design to collective analysis.
Follow the crop cycle through five interconnected stages: trial design and participant onboarding; seed preparation and distribution; field observations during crop development; harvest, post-harvest, and sensory evaluation; and data consolidation and feedback.
Combine two complementary forms of evaluation throughout the process. First, conduct agronomic evaluation under real growing conditions. Participants observe crop development, plant health, productivity, management practices, and varietal performance at key phenological stages.
Second, conduct sensory evaluation after harvest. Participants evaluate the tomatoes they cultivated under real consumption conditions. When feasible, complement this with collective tasting activities involving external consumers.
Bring these two streams of information together during collective analysis. Use the results to support variety selection, future breeding decisions, participant feedback, and dissemination activities.
Collaborative evaluation process: integration of agronomic and sensory assessment.
Trial Design and Participant Onboarding
7w
Define the Trial Objectives
Participatory Tomato Breeding Co-design workshop. Credits: Manuel Correa
Before starting the participatory evaluation process, define the purpose of the trial and the Target Product Profile together with participants. This helps make the evaluation relevant, comparable across sites and growing seasons, and aligned with participants’ priorities.
The purpose of the trial may include varietal evaluation, participatory selection, and/or conservation of tomato accessions. It may also be part of a broader participatory breeding process.
Define the Target Product Profile as a shared description of the desired characteristics of the crop or variety. Include traits related to agronomic performance, culinary qualities, cultural relevance, and adaptation to local growing conditions.
Use the trial purpose and the Target Product Profile to guide the selection of seed materials and the traits to be observed. Make sure the selected traits align with the observation stages and fields included in the shared Observation Template provided in this protocol. If participants prioritize new traits, adapt the Observation Template accordingly, while preserving alignment across phenological stages and comparability across sites.
Define the trial purpose and the Target Product Profile through participatory processes, such as co-design workshops, surveys, or collective analysis of results from previous evaluation cycles. Use these spaces to discuss participant priorities, local needs, and contextual realities. An example of a co-design workshop is documented in the Bioleft participatory tomato workshop – FAUBA, 2020.
4w
Define and Prepare Seed Materials
Germination test. Credits: Sabrina Rendón
Once the trial purpose and the Target Product Profile are defined, select and prepare the tomato accessions for distribution.
Source candidate accessions from public germplasm banks, previous participatory evaluation or breeding cycles, or seed-saving networks. Document the provenance, multiplication history, and key metadata of each accession to support traceability throughout the trial.
Select three tomato accessions that are genetically distinct and reflect the traits prioritized for the current trial cycle. Bring together scientific criteria and participants’ preferences when making this selection, drawing on the priorities defined during the co-design phase. When feasible, perform germination tests to check seed viability before distribution.
Include a local check variety as a reference when appropriate. This may be either a commonly grown commercial variety or a locally adapted farmer variety already known to the participant. The local check is optional and context-dependent. Its purpose is to support relative comparison under each participant’s conditions, rather than to impose strict standardization across sites.
Prepare enough seeds to provide each participant with at least 10 seeds per accession, aiming to secure a minimum of 6–8 viable plants per accession under typical growing conditions.
Do not require within-site replication, such as multiple plots per accession per participant. Instead, use a participatory and citizen science approach in which each participant represents a single observational unit. In this design, robustness emerges from bringing together observations across many participants and diverse environments, rather than from controlled replication within a single site. This allows varietal performance to be evaluated under real growing conditions while keeping the trial feasible for non-expert participants (Van Etten et al., 2019).
Assign each accession a clear and unambiguous code or name, such as “Accession A,” “Accession B,” and “Accession C.” Use the same naming system across seed envelopes, the Observation Template, and all communication materials to avoid confusion, misidentification, or data loss.
3w
Recruit and Onboard Participants
Invite agroecological producers, family farmers, and gardeners who are interested in heirloom or Creole tomato varieties, whether for self-consumption or local markets. Prioritize people cultivating under diverse, low-input conditions and those interested in flavor, resilience, biodiversity conservation, and locally adapted tomato varieties. No formal technical training is required.
Select participants based on their willingness and capacity to grow the tomato accessions under their usual conditions, record observations throughout the crop cycle, and take part in shared learning and collective reflection.
Use the following criteria to guide participant selection:
Growing context: Prioritize agroecological producers, family farmers, and gardeners cultivating tomatoes in home gardens, community gardens, peri-urban plots, or small farms under diverse, low-input conditions.
Commitment to participation: Invite participants who are willing to cultivate three tomato accessions, record observations throughout the growing cycle, and engage in peer learning and collective reflection activities.
Interest alignment: Give priority to participants interested in flavor, resilience, biodiversity conservation, and locally adapted tomato varieties, whether for self-consumption or local markets.
Geographic and contextual diversity: Build a participant group that reflects diverse territories, agroecological conditions, production contexts, and experiences. This diversity strengthens comparative analysis and collective learning.
Continuity and learning: When possible, combine participants with prior experience in Bioleft campaigns and new participants. This supports continuity while expanding the network and bringing in new perspectives.
In participatory and citizen science-based trials, not all recruited participants complete the full observation cycle. In previous Bioleft campaigns, the effective participation rate—defined as participants who complete the observation process or provide sufficient data for analysis—has been approximately 15% (Cremaschi et al., 2025).
For this reason, prioritize commitment, continuity, and accompaniment during participant selection and onboarding. Recent campaigns have worked with cohorts of approximately 30–40 participants, selected based on prior participation, demonstrated completion of previous trials, or explicit commitment to remain engaged throughout the cycle. This approach balances feasibility with data quality and is consistent with distributed experimental designs, where robustness emerges from bringing together observations across participants and environments rather than from large initial recruitment alone (van Etten et al., 2020; Cremaschi et al., 2025).
Participant Recruitment Process
Recruit participants through an open and transparent call aligned with the objectives of the trial.
Share the call through social media platforms and relevant networks related to agroecology, seed saving, community gardening, and participatory breeding.
Invite interested individuals to complete a digital sign-up form to request seeds and join the trial. Use the form to collect basic personal information, growing context, and voluntary demographic data. A model sign-up form is available here: Participatory Tomato Trial- Sign-Up Form.docx16.6KB
Participatory Tomato Trial- Sign-Up Form.docx16.6KB Seek balanced participation in terms of gender, geographic distribution, and growing contexts. Support this objective through targeted outreach and inclusive form design.
To further support participation and data completeness, request selected participants to review and sign a participation commitment form prior to seed distribution. This document clarifies roles, expectations, and responsibilities throughout the evaluation process. A model informed consent / participation commitment form is available here. Informed Consent Form.docx19.3KB
Informed Consent Form.docx19.3KB 3w
Prepare and Distribute Materials
Seed Packaging and Labeling of Tomato Accessions (Bioleft). Credits: Karina Schofield
Prepare and distribute a complete package to each participant before the recommended planting period.
Label each seed package and envelope clearly. Include the following information:
- Accession name or code
- Place of origin
- Harvest year or seed multiplication date
Complete seed distribution at least 2–3 weeks before the expected sowing date. This gives participants time to prepare the soil or containers, plan the trial, review the materials, and ask questions before sowing.
Use one or more of the following distribution channels, depending on the context:
By mail: Send seed packages using registered post or courier services. Enable tracking when possible and confirm receipt with participants.
By hand: Deliver seed packages in person during workshops, meetings, or direct handover.
Through local allies: Work with trusted community-based organizations, local networks, or partner institutions to distribute seeds when appropriate.
Keep track of all deliveries and confirm that participants have received their seed packages. Use the seed distribution tracking database provided here: 
Seed distribution tracking database.xlsx
Seed distribution tracking database.xlsx Provide each participant with a digital welcome kit to support implementation and communication throughout the trial. Include the following components:
- Observation Template (Excel-based): Send the Observation Template electronically (by email or instant messaging). Ensure that fields are organized by phenological stage and accession. Provide basic guidance on how to complete the template, including where to enter observations and how to save and submit the file.
- Communication channel invitation: Share a digital invitation to an online group or other designated communication channel used for ongoing support, coordination, and sharing of experiences throughout the campaign.
- Supplementary learning materials: Provide access to visual and written materials that support participants during the growing cycle, such as:
- Instructional videos like tutorials on tomato cultivation from seed to harvest, YouTube tutorial on how to grow tomatoes from seed to fruit
- Example cases, including reference photos and completed Observation Templates
Ensure that all materials are accessible using commonly available devices and do not require specialized software beyond standard spreadsheet tools.
Invite participants to a kick-off webinar or workshop to review the protocol, Observation Template, and key observation stages. An example of a kick-off workshop is available here: https://youtu.be/fVAg0whFJ5w?si=_YuVxwdWlYxLZstF
2w
Implementing the Trial
39w 0d 0h 6m
Set Up the On-Farm Trial
Set up the trial under each participant’s usual growing conditions. Do not require a standardized plot size. The aim is to observe how each tomato accession performs in real-life cultivation contexts, rather than in controlled or optimized experimental settings.
Grow all accessions under similar conditions and avoid giving special care to one accession over the others. Use the participant’s usual management practices, and document any relevant differences that may help interpret the results.
Complete the trial metadata fields in the Observation Template before or at the start of the trial. Use these fields to identify the campaign, participant, location, growing context, and tomato accessions under evaluation.
| A | B | C | |
| Description (what to complete) | Example | ||
| Campaign | years | 2025-2026 | |
| Evaluator: | Participant name | ||
| Location: | City/ village level | ||
| Province: | Province level | ||
| Evaluated Accessions | |||
| Accession 1: | Name of accession 1 | Accession N 113 | |
| Accession 2: | Name of accession 2 | ||
| Accession 3: | Name of accession 3 |
Metadata fields used to identify the campaign, participant, location, and evaluated tomato accessions. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos
3d
Initiate the Trial: Sowing and Early Growth
Sowing. Credits: Patricio Devoto
Sow the seeds under conditions suitable for tomato germination. Choose the sowing date according to local climate, participant availability, and the recommended planting period for the region.
When possible, record the environmental conditions at sowing, including:
- Day temperature: ideally between 21–27°C
- Night temperature: ideally between 13–18°C
- Relative humidity: ideally between 60–80%
Keep each accession clearly identified throughout all stages of the trial. To avoid mixing materials:
Sow accessions separately.
Use separate containers, trays, or seedbeds for each accession.
Label containers, trays, and plants at every step.
When appropriate, consider staggered sowing. Plant half of the seeds first and the remaining seeds 10–15 days later. This can help reduce climatic risk and increase the chances of having healthy seedlings available for transplanting.
If seeds are sown directly in soil or in the containers where plants will remain until harvest, maintain the same level of care in accession identification.
Record sowing and emergence observations for each evaluated accession in the provided Observation Template, not directly in this protocol.
| A | B | C | |
| Description (what to complete) | Example | ||
| Accession number → | Indicate the accession number or code corresponding to each column. This field links the observations in this table to the specific tomato accessions defined in the metadata section and ensures consistent identification across all stages of the trial. | 113 | |
| Sowing method | Indicate how the seeds were sown for each accession. Specify whether sowing was carried out in seedbeds, trays, containers, or directly in soil, and note any relevant characteristics of the method used (e.g. type of container, substrate, or spacing). This information helps contextualize emergence and early plant establishment. | Seed tray with individual cells, organic substrate | |
| Sowing date | Record the calendar date on which the seeds of each accession were sown. Use the date format specified in the Observation Template. This information is used to contextualize emergence timing and subsequent developmental stages. | 15 September 2025 | |
| Number of seeds sown | Record the total number of seeds sown for each accession at the time of planting. This information is used to assess emergence rates and early establishment performance. | 10 | |
| Emergence date(when 70% of seedlings have emerged) | Record the calendar date on which approximately 70% of the seedlings of an accession have emerged. This threshold is used to standardize emergence timing across accessions and growing conditions. | 22 September 2025 | |
| Number of emerged seedlings | Enter the total number of seedlings that emerged. | 8 | |
| General comments | Add any relevant notes or observations not captured elsewhere. | Emergence was uniform. Two seedlings emerged later and were weaker. Cooler nights during the first week after sowing. |
Observation Template section for recording sowing and emergence data by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos
4w
Transplant to Containers or Soil
Transplant seedlings when they have at least two fully expanded leaves. Move them from the seedbed or nursery to their final growing location, either into containers or directly into the soil.
Choose the transplanting date according to seedling development and local conditions. Avoid transplanting when frost, very low temperatures, or extreme weather may affect seedling establishment.
Record the transplanting date in the Observation Template for each accession.
When seedlings are transplanted to containers or soil, record the corresponding information for each accession in the provided spreadsheet. If seedlings are transplanted to containers, complete the container transplanting fields in the Observation Template.
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Container location | Indicate whether the plants are grown outdoors or under protected conditions (e.g. greenhouse, shade structure). | Patio and/or terrace | |
| Container depth (cm) | Enter the depth of the container used for growing the plants, measured in centimeters. | 120 cm | |
| Substrate used (indicate all that apply; e.g. soil, compost, vermiculite, sand, peat, garden soil, others) | List all substrate components used in the container. Provide enough detail to understand root development and nutrient availability. | Compost produced at home using household organic waste | |
| Associated crop | Indicate any other crops grown together with tomato plants in the same container or nearby. | basil, calendula | |
| Transplanting date | Record the calendar date on which seedlings were transplanted to the container. | 14/12/2025 | |
| Number of seedlings established | Enter the number of seedlings that successfully established after transplanting. | 7, 8 | |
| Number of seedlings transplanted | Enter the total number of seedlings transplanted for each accession. | 8, 10 | |
| General comments | Add any relevant notes or observations not captured elsewhere. | Most of the seeds estabilished well |
Observation Template fields for recording transplanting conditions and early establishment by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos
Transplant to containers. Credits: Norma Quinteros
If seedlings are transplanted to soil, complete the following information in the provided spreadsheet:
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Indicate accession number → | Enter the accession number or code corresponding to each column. This links observations to the correct accession across all stages. | Accession A | |
| Plot location | Describe where the plot is located (e.g. field, garden, farm, neighborhood, reference landmarks). | Home garden, backyard | |
| Plot area (m²) | Enter the total surface area of the plot where the accession is grown, measured in square meters. | 6 m² | |
| Transplanting date | Record the calendar date on which seedlings were transplanted to the soil. | 18-10-25 | |
| Number of plants transplanted to the plot | Enter the total number of seedlings transplanted to the plot for each accession. | 10 | |
| Plant density (plants/m²) | Enter the planting density calculated as number of plants per square meter. | 1.6 | |
| Soil cover | Indicate whether soil cover is used and specify the type if applicable (e.g. mulch, straw, plastic, living cover). | Straw mulch | |
| Associated crop | Indicate any other crops grown together with tomatoes in the same plot or nearby. | Basil, marigold | |
| Number of plants established | Enter the number of plants that successfully established after transplanting. | 9 | |
| General comments | Add any relevant notes related to transplanting, soil conditions, weather events, or early losses not captured in other fields. | One plant lost after heavy rain |
Observation Template fields for recording transplanting conditions and establishment in soil. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos.
Transplant to soil. Credits: Ailín Fernandez
3d
Crop Management
Apply crop management practices according to each participant’s usual growing conditions throughout the tomato cycle. These practices may be repeated at different moments depending on plant development, environmental conditions, and local management decisions.
Record the date(s) of each management practice in the Observation Template for each accession. When relevant, also record the frequency of the practice.
Use this information to help interpret varietal performance across different contexts. Management records provide important context for understanding observed differences between accessions, participants, and growing environments.
Pruning. Credits: Yael Tachdjian
Record the following management practices for each accession in the provided spreadsheet, indicating the date(s) and, when applicable, the number of times each practice was carried out.
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Pruning | Record the date(s) on which pruning (removal of side shoots/suckers) was carried out and how many times the practice was performed. | 2 times: 10-01-26; 12-02-26 | |
| Staking | Record the date(s) on which staking was carried out and how many times the practice was performed. | 1 time: 20-01-26 | |
| Training | Record the date(s) on which plant training was carried out and how many times the practice was performed. | 3 times: 25-01-26; 10-02-26; 28-02-26 | |
| Fertilization | Record the date(s) on which fertilization was applied and how many times the practice was performed. Specify only timing and frequency. | 2 times: 05-02-26; 05-03-26 | |
| Weed management | Record the date(s) on which weed control was carried out and how many times the practice was performed. | 3 times: 15-01-26; 01-02-26; 20-02-26 | |
| Irrigation | Record the date(s) and frequency of irrigation events during the period. | Weekly irrigation, January–March | |
| Irrigation intensity | Indicate the approximate intensity of irrigation (e.g., abundant, moderate, scarce) | Abundant | |
| Irrigation method | Indicate the method used (e.g., manual watering, drip irrigation, hose). | Manual | |
| Pest management | Record the date(s) on which pest control practices were applied and how many times the practice was performed. | 2 times: 18-02-26; 05-03-26 | |
| Pest management product | Indicate the type of product used (e.g., copper, potassium soap, neem-based products) | Potassium soap | |
| Product dose | Indicate the approximate dose or concentration of the product. Complete with 0 if no product was used. | One spoon per liter | |
| General comments | Add any relevant notes related to management practices, such as changes in strategy, unusual events, or contextual information not captured above. | Increased pruning after heavy vegetative growth |
Observation Template fields for recording crop management practices by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos; with contributions from Ileana Iocola.
6m
Growth and Development
Observe plant growth and development after transplanting. Pay particular attention to phenological progression, stress responses, plant health, and uniformity.
Use these observations to understand how each accession responds to local growing conditions and management practices over time.
Record the growth and development observations for each accession in the Observation Template. Use visual assessment and comparative judgment when completing ratings and dates. These observations are intended to support interpretation of varietal performance, not to provide formal diagnosis.
Complete the growth and development fields for each accession in the provided spreadsheet.
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Indicate accession number → | Enter the accession number or code corresponding to each column to ensure consistent identification across all observation stages. | Accession A | |
| Date of first flowering | Record the calendar date on which at least half of the plants of the accession show their first flowers. | 20-11-25 | |
| Tolerance to water stress (1–5) | Rate the accession’s tolerance to water stress using a scale from 1 (not tolerant) to 5 (very tolerant), based on observed plant response under local conditions. | 4 | |
| Tolerance to sunburn (1–5) | Rate the accession’s tolerance to sunburn using a scale from 1 (not tolerant) to 5 (very tolerant), based on visible damage. Typical symptoms may include brown or whitish leaf edges, dry or brittle spots on leaves or fruits. | 3 | |
| Plant health (1–5) | Rate the overall health status of the plants using a scale from 1 (very poor health) to 5 (very healthy), considering vigor, foliage condition, and absence of visible stress or damage. | 4 | |
| Uniformity (1–5) | Rate how similar the plants of the same accession are to each other using a scale from 1 (not uniform) to 5 (very uniform). | 2 | |
| What do you think explains the observed uniformity? | Briefly describe possible reasons for the level of uniformity observed (e.g. genetic variability, uneven emergence, environmental heterogeneity, management differences). | Uneven emergence and variable plant size | |
| Observed pests | List any pests observed on the plants during this phase. Do not attempt formal identification if unsure. | Aphids, whiteflies | |
| Plant death due to pests and diseases * | Indicate whether any plants died or were removed due to suspected Tomato brown rugose fruit virus. If yes, record the number of affected plants.* | Yes – 2 plants | |
| General comments | Add any additional observations related to plant growth, development, or stress that are not captured in the fields above. | Plants recovered after rainfall |
Observation Template fields for recording growth, development, and stress responses by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos.
*Plant death due to pests and diseases
When relevant to the local context, facilitators may include specific priority diseases (e.g., Tomato brown rugose fruit virus, bacterial wilt, or other regionally prevalent pathogens) as explicit variables in the observation template.
The selection of target diseases should be adapted to the most significant phytosanitary constraints of each region. In this case, the protocol should be accompanied by context-specific identification tools designed to support participants with different levels of technical knowledge and literacy.
For example, visual identification guides combining photographs and simple descriptions of symptoms—such as the Bioleft ToBRFV guide (see pages 1–2 for symptom descriptions and pages 3–7 for visual references)—can support more reliable field observations and reporting.
When disease identification is uncertain, participants are encouraged to describe symptoms rather than assign a formal diagnosis. This approach prioritizes observational consistency while remaining accessible to non-expert users.
Bioleft - VIRUS RUGOSO DEL TOMATE.pdf1.5MB 16w
Practices During Fruiting
Observe and document any management practices applied during the fruiting period, from early fruit set to the beginning of harvest.
Use these records to describe how participants manage plant vigor, fruit development, and maturation under local growing conditions. These practices are optional and context-dependent; participants should only record them when they are part of their usual management.
Record the date(s) and a brief description of each practice in the Observation Template for each accession.
Use this information to help interpret fruit size, uniformity, maturation timing, and harvest results. Complete the fruiting management fields for each accession in the provided spreadsheet.
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Indicate accession number → | Enter the accession number or code corresponding to each column to ensure consistent identification across all observation stages. | Accession A | |
| Fruit thinning | Indicate whether fruit thinning was carried out. If yes, record the date(s) and briefly describe the practice (e.g. removal of excess or malformed fruits). | Yes – 15-02-26 | |
| Removal of apical shoot | Indicate whether the apical shoot (growing tip) was removed during fruiting. If yes, record the date(s). | Yes – 01-03-26 | |
| General comments | Add any relevant notes related to management practices during fruiting, such as reasons for interventions, observed effects on fruit size or maturation, or contextual information not captured above. | Apical shoot removed to limit vegetative growth |
Observation Template fields for recording management practices applied during fruiting by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos
8w
Harvest and Post-harvest
Harvest fruits when they reach eating maturity according to local use and preference. In most cases, this corresponds to near-full coloration.
Use this phase to record harvest characteristics, yield, fruit quality, and short-term post-harvest performance under household storage conditions.
Record harvest and post-harvest information for each accession in the Observation Template. Use practical measurements and estimates that are feasible under on-farm, garden, or household conditions.
Complete the harvest and post-harvest fields for each accession in the provided spreadsheet.
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Indicate accession number → | Enter the accession number or code corresponding to each column to ensure consistent identification across all observation stages. | Accession A | |
| Harvest date #1 | Record the calendar date of the first harvest event for the accession. | 10-01-26 | |
| Harvest date #2 | Record the calendar date of the second harvest event, if applicable. | 17-01-26 | |
| Harvest date #3 | Record the calendar date of the third harvest event, if applicable. | 25-01-26 | |
| Harvest date #4 | Record the calendar date of the fourth harvest event, if applicable. Leave blank if not applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #5 | Record the calendar date of the fifth harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #6 | Record the calendar date of the sixth harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #7 | Record the calendar date of the seventh harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #8 | Record the calendar date of the eighth harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #9 | Record the calendar date of the ninth harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Harvest date #10 | Record the calendar date of the tenth harvest event, if applicable. | — | |
| Fruit color at harvest | Describe the predominant fruit color at the time of harvest (e.g. red, yellow, orange). As a reference, fruits are often harvested when they reach approximately 90% of their final color, with minimal green areas near the stem. | 90% red | |
| Number of fruits harvested | Enter the total number of healthy, mature fruits harvested and considered suitable for consumption across all harvests. | 12 | |
| Total weight of harvested fruits (kg) | Record the total weight of all harvested fruits, measured in kilograms. Use a household scale when possible. If individual weighing is not feasible, estimate using a representative average fruit. | 3 kg | |
| Post-harvest duration (days)* | Record the number of days that a sample of 10 harvested fruits remains suitable for consumption under ambient (room) conditions, reflecting typical household storage practices.* | 5 | |
| General comments | Add any relevant observations related to harvest timing, fruit quality, storage behavior, losses, or variability between harvests not captured above. | Fruits softened after day 5 |
Observation Template fields for recording harvest and post-harvest observations by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos.
* Post-harvest duration (days)
When relevant, participants may also record post-harvest duration under refrigerated conditions. In such cases, the storage condition should be clearly specified in the Observation Template.
If both measurements are available, participants are encouraged to report both values to support comparative analysis.
10w
Sensory evaluation
Sensory Evaluation
Participatory tasting session for sensory evaluation of creole tomato accessions. Credits: Sofía Casals.
Conduct two complementary instances of sensory evaluation.
1. Conduct participant-based evaluation on-farm
Ask producers and gardeners to evaluate the sensory qualities of the tomatoes they cultivate, including flavor, texture, aroma, appearance, and overall appreciation.
Carry out these evaluations under real consumption conditions, so they reflect situated, experience-based knowledge.
2. Conduct consumer-based evaluation through collective tasting events
Organize collective tasting events with external consumers, such as community members, market actors, students, researchers, chefs, or other institutional participants.
Use these events to capture a broader range of preferences beyond producers’ perspectives.
Invite consumers through open calls, local networks, or institutional partnerships, depending on the context.
When feasible, include at least 20–30 evaluators to support a more robust interpretation of preferences.
Data collection formats
Make both digital and printed data collection formats available for sensory evaluation activities.
Use digital tools such as Google Forms, Mentimeter, ODK, KoboToolbox/KoboCollect, or similar platforms when possible. These tools can support real-time data entry, reduce transcription errors, and simplify data consolidation.
Provide printed forms for participants or consumers who prefer analogue support, have limited digital access, or feel more comfortable completing the evaluation on paper. This is especially important in collective tasting events, where participants may have different levels of familiarity with digital tools.
When using printed forms, plan additional time for data processing. Enter paper-based responses digitally, review them, and check that they are consistent before adding them to the database. Allocate sufficient time after the sensory evaluation activity for transcription, data cleaning, and validation.
Use the same variables, scales, accession names or codes, and response options in both digital and printed formats to maintain comparability across responses.
Conduct evaluations using a 9-point hedonic scale, where:
1 = dislike very much
5 = neither like nor dislike / neutral
9 = like very much
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| How much do you like this tomato? | Overall appreciation of the tomato, rated on a scale from 1 (dislike very much) to 9 (like very much). | 8 | |
| Sweet | Perceived sweetness intensity, rated from 1 (not sweet) to 9 (very sweet). | 6 | |
| Acidic | Perceived acidity intensity, rated from 1 (not acidic) to 9 (very acidic). | 8 | |
| Juicy | Perceived juiciness of the fruit, rated from 1 (not juicy) to 9 (very juicy). | 4 | |
| Persistent flavor | Perceived persistence of flavor after tasting, rated from 1 (not persistent) to 9 (very persistent). | 4 | |
| Ripe tomato aroma | Intensity of aroma associated with ripe tomato, rated from 1 (very weak) to 9 (very strong). | 2 | |
| Green tomato aroma | Intensity of aroma associated with green or unripe tomato, rated from 1 (very weak) to 9 (very strong). | 8 | |
| Low flesh content | Perception of low pulp/flesh content, rated from 1 (not perceived) to 9 (strongly perceived). | 2 | |
| Firm flesh | Perception of firm flesh texture, rated from 1 (not firm) to 9 (very firm). | 2 | |
| Soft flesh | Perception of soft flesh texture, rated from 1 (not soft) to 9 (very soft). | 8 | |
| Many seeds | Perception of high seed content, rated from 1 (few seeds) to 9 (many seeds). | 9 | |
| Few seeds | Perception of low seed content, rated from 1 (not perceived) to 9 (strongly perceived). | 2 | |
| Watery | Perception of watery texture, rated from 1 (not watery) to 9 (very watery). | 8 | |
| Pasty | Perception of pasty or floury texture, rated from 1 (not pasty) to 9 (very pasty). | 1 | |
| Tough skin | Perception of skin toughness, rated from 1 (not tough) to 9 (very tough). | 5 |
Observation Template fields for recording sensory evaluation of tomato fruits by accession. Credits: María Laura Bravo & María Paz dos Santos.
1d
Uses, culinary techniques, and practices
Document the contexts of use and culinary practices associated with each evaluated tomato variety.
Include culinary techniques and interventions such as fresh consumption, cooking, preservation, processing, drying, fermentation, or other preparations. Also record observations on how the fruit performs in the kitchen and include concrete examples of recipes or preparations when available.
Use this section to connect the agronomic, sensory, and post-harvest characteristics observed for each variety with actual consumption patterns and culinary practices.
Record this information to help identify specific use aptitudes and support variety selection. For example, some varieties may be better suited for fresh consumption, while others may perform better in sauces, preserves, drying, baking, or other preparations.
When relevant, use the information collected in this section as input for the collaborative development of a recipe repository associated with the evaluated varieties. This repository may also include geographic references to document where specific uses, preparations, or preferences emerge.
For each variety, document the following:
| Field | Description (what to complete) | Example | |
| Context of use | Identify one or more of the following contexts in which the variety is actually used: 1. Household/home use; 2. Direct sale (farmers’ markets or other); 3. Gastronomic project; 4. Other (e.g., community kitchens, school food programs). | 3. Gastronomic project | |
| Culinary interventions / techniques | Identify one or more of the following culinary techniques in which the variety is actually used: 1. Fresh/raw consumption; 2. Sauce; 3. Juice; 4. Preserves; 5. Dehydration; 6. Jam; 7. Fermentation; 8. Drying; 9. Baking; 10. Other. | 9. Baking | |
| Culinary comment | Provide a comment describing the variety based on actual culinary experience and highlighting one or more characteristics relevant for its use. | Example: “Variety X is ideal for making jams because it has abundant flesh, a characteristic sweetness, and few seeds” or “Variety Z is not recommended for sun drying due to its high water content and limited flesh.” |
Observation Template fields: Uses, culinary techniques, and practices. Credits: Malena Giai.
Data Consolidation and Feedback
8w
At the end of the evaluation cycle, collect the Observation Templates completed by participants and bring the information together in a centralized database.
Clean, harmonize, and review the data to support consistency across participants, accessions, and observation stages. Use the automatically generated fields from the final sheet of each Observation Template to aggregate information while preserving traceability to individual trials and contexts.
Based on the consolidated database, prepare a collective results report that brings together agronomic, sensory, and experiential findings from the campaign. Use the report to compare accessions, identify patterns observed under different growing conditions, and document participant interpretations and reflections.
An example of this type of synthesis is provided in the report “Mejoramiento Participativo de Tomate: Aprendizajes de la campaña 2024–2025” (attached), which shows how distributed observations can be transformed into shared knowledge outputs.
DT4-CENIT-Bioleft-Mejoramiento-Participativo-de-Tomate.-Aprendizajes-de-la-campana-de-2024-2025.pdf5.9MB .To close the cycle, organize a collective feedback workshop with participants, breeders, researchers, and partner organizations. Use this space to share and discuss the results, interpret findings collectively, reflect on the trial methodology, and identify implications for future selection, conservation, or breeding cycles.A recorded example of a feedback workshop is available here:
https://youtu.be/Xhrdqwst1u0?si=nqDTMGlzCWn5G2OF
Use insights from data consolidation, reports, and collective discussions to revise the protocol, improve observation tools, and define priorities for future campaigns. In this way, data consolidation and feedback are not only analytical steps, but also central moments of participatory learning, collective interpretation, and co-design.
8w
Protocol references
Ajates, R., Bocci, R., Bhutani, S., Cremaschi, A., Kloppenburg, J., Kotschi, J., ... & Wanjama, D. (2025). Recovering res communis from res propia: how does open source seed contribute to farmers’ seed rights and breeding for diversity?. Agriculture and Human Values, 1-21.
Bravo, M. L., Dos Santos, M. P., & Cuppari, S. (2023). EvAnálisis y propuesta de continuidad del proyecto de la FAUBA de recuperación y caracterización de Recursos Genéticos locales de tomate (Solanum lycopersicum L.) Río Negro, 29 de noviembre al 1º de diciembre de 2023.
Cremaschi, A., Bravo, M. L., Schrauf, G., del Valle, R., Tachdjian, Y., Rendón, S., Sánchez, A., Castro, I., Asinsten, J., Sánchez, J., Chena, F., Ríos, J., Delfino, P., Ferrari, E., Ferreyra, M., Angaut, G., Polimeni, F., Devoto, P. E., Hughes, M. O., … Montero, C. (2025). Bioleft: Mejoramiento participativo de tomate. Aprendizajes de la campaña 2024–2025 (Documentos de Trabajo CENIT, N.º 4/2025).
Cremaschi, A., Laporte, M.-A., Manners, R., Nyirahabimana, H., & de Sousa, K. (2026). Standard operating procedures for citizen science experiments using the tricot approach (v0.1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18428280
Cremaschi, A., & Van Zwanenberg, P. (2020). Bioleft: open-source seeds for low-input farming systems. Journal of Fair Trade, 2(1), 39-43.
Marin, A., Van Zwanenberg, P., & Cremaschi, A. (2021). Bioleft: A collaborative, open source seed breeding initiative for sustainable agriculture. In Transformative Pathways to Sustainability (pp. 90-108). Routledge.
Mitidieri, M., & Polack, L. (2012). Guía de monitoreo y reconocimiento de plagas, enfermedades y enemigos naturales de tomate y pimiento. EEA INTA San Pedro, 87.
Polack, L. A., & Mitidieri, M. S. (2005). Producción de tomate diferenciado. Protocolo preliminar de manejo integrado de plagas y enfermedades.
Strassera, M. E., Sarandón, S. J., Luna, M. G., & Polack, A. (2009). Análisis de la sustentabilidad de tres alternativas de manejo de plagas en tomate bajo cubierta en el cinturón hortícola platense. Cadernos de Agroecologia [Volumes 1 (2006) to 12 (2017)], 4(1).
van Etten, J., Abidin, E., Arnaud, D., Brown, E., Carey, E., Laporte, M.-L., López-Noriega, I., Madriz, B., Manners, R., Ortiz-Crespo, B., Quirós, C., de Sousa, K., Teeken, B., Tufan, H. A., Ulzen, J., & Valle-Soto, J. (2020). The tricot citizen science approach applied to on-farm variety evaluation: Methodological progress and perspectives (RTB Working Paper No. 2021-2). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB). http://www.rtb.cgiar.org
Van Etten, J., Beza, E., Calderer, L., van Duijvendijk, K., Fadda, C., Fantahun, B., Kidane, Y. G., & others. (2019). First experiences with a novel farmer citizen science approach: Crowdsourcing participatory variety selection through on-farm triadic comparisons of technologies (tricot). Experimental Agriculture, 55(S1), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479716000739
Acknowledgements
This protocol was co-developed through the collective efforts of farmers, gardeners, researchers, facilitators, and seed communities engaged in Bioleft’s participatory breeding network.
We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the growers who dedicated time, knowledge, and care to evaluating tomato accessions across diverse agroecological contexts. Their observations, feedback, and lived experience were fundamental to shaping, testing, and refining this protocol.
We also thank the Faculty of Agronomy of the University of Buenos Aires (FAUBA) for their collaboration in the recovery and multiplication of Creole tomato varieties, and the Asociación para la Agricultura Biológico-Dinámica (AABDA) for their active participation in early field trials and co-design processes.
We are especially grateful to the external reviewers who generously contributed their time, careful reading, and methodological reflections to strengthen this protocol: Adam Alexander (Garden Organic); Florencia Arancibia (CENIT–EEyN–UNSAM); Kate Genevieve (Astro Ecologies Institute (Aotearoa/New Zealan); Ileana Iocola (CREA-AA); and Dr. Rodel G. Maghirang (Institute of Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and Food Science, University of the Philippines Los Baños).
This work was supported by funding from the Conservation, Food and Health Foundation and the National University of San Martín (UNSAM), whose support made the development of this project possible.
This protocol is part of Bioleft’s broader commitment to open-source seeds, farmer-led innovation, and the democratization of agricultural knowledge. We thank all organizations, institutions, and volunteers who contributed to its development and implementation. Special recognition goes to the Bioleft technical and coordination team, and to all those who continue to sustain a living, evolving commons for seed sovereignty.