The Ruminant: Audio Candy for Farmers, Gardeners and Food Lovers - Crop Wild Relatives in Plant Breeding

Episode Date: June 2, 2022

This episode I speak with Dr. Patrick Byrne, Professor Emeritus of Plant Breeding and Genetics at Colorado State University. Our topic: crop wild relatives, the forebears to all of the agricultural crops we love and depend on. Patrick helps us understand the relationship between, say, Teosinte and modern corn, and why the conservation of these wild relatives is crucial to the improvement of our crop cultivars. Links: Grin-U.org: a great repository for online learning materials on plant genetic resources conservation and use.Free Ebook: Crop Wild Relatives & Their Use in Plant BreedingOr some related videos insteadOur guest on the Farmer Questionnaire in this episode was Tracy Robertson of Stony Mountain Farm in BC's Cariboo Region.

I'm Jordan Marr, and this is The Ruminant, a podcast about food politics, food security, and the cultural and practical aspects of farming. You can learn more at theruminant.ca, and you can email me at info at theruminant.ca. All right, let's do a show. Today's main segment is about crop wild relatives. So on this show, we spend a lot of time talking about where our food comes from, but today a lot of time talking about where our food comes from. But today we're going to focus on where our food comes from. You know, in terms of the arc of human history. Have you ever looked at an ear of corn and considered that it's the product of a wild ancestor plant that's dramatically different in form, flavor, and function? The

conversation you're about to hear is focused on the genetic forebears to our modern crops and why they're still important. And honestly, the more you learn about this topic, the more that ear of corn in your hand starts to feel like a miracle. That conversation in just a sec. First, I'll let our guest introduce himself. Hello, I'm Pat Byrne, a semi-retired professor at Colorado State University, where I've focused on plant breeding and genetics. And I have a particular interest in genetic diversity, conserving and using things that are in our global seed banks. I have worked with corn, wheat, tomatoes, canola, and find them all fascinating. Dr. Patrick Byrne, thank you so much for joining me on the Ruminant Podcast.

You're welcome. Glad to be with you, Jordan. Pat, I've asked you on the podcast because of a book you co-wrote with Gail Voak of the USDA called Crop Wild Relatives and Their Use in Plant Breeding, which is available for free online. And we'll link to that in the show notes for this episode. I'm wondering if we could just start with the basics. Can you tell us what are crop wild relatives? Well, these are species that grow in the wild that are related to and sometimes the direct ancestors of the crop plants that we grow. Usually there are very close relatives as well as more distant ones. And depending on the purpose, they can all be useful for plant breeders to find the useful genetic variation they're looking for.

One of the issues with crop wild relatives is that in their native habitat, they are threatened due to human use of the land, due to climate change, due to things like wars going on. So there's really a sense of urgency that we need to do all that we can to collect and conserve this diversity before it's lost forever. I think, you know, most of us who are in the farming and gardening world who grow crops, I mean, the concept of crop breeding, you know, we all grasp it on a basic level. But I think a lot of us take for granted that all of our modern agricultural crops have some wild progenitor, right? Like we don't, I don't think a lot of us think, spend much time thinking about those ancestors and that everything we're growing has some iteration

that came a long time before that I would say, I would guess usually looks a lot different from what we're, you know, what we're used to seeing and growing now. Yeah, yeah, that's very true. seeing and growing now. Yeah, yeah, that's very true. And we don't often think about the ancestors of the crops, but maybe even less so, we don't think about our human ancestors, who are actually the ones responsible for this. So I think as a species, we're hugely indebted to those people over many generations who, through their power of observation, were able to identify particular variants that would be useful for increasing

productivity and selecting for those crops. So one of the things, especially this is true in grain crops, is that when they mature, the grain tends to shatter, meaning the grain falls off the crop, falls off the plant onto the ground, and so making it extremely difficult to harvest that way. So that non-shattering trait of having all the grains of barley or wheat stay on the head so it could be harvested as a unit, that was a huge advancement. Other things like reduced branching is something that happened often during the process of domestication. So think of a domestic sunflower variety, a single stalk, one big head with a lot of seeds on it, compared to the wild sunflowers that you might have seen. Many small flowers, many branches. So just having that

reduced branching really makes the process of harvesting much easier and results in higher yield in most cases, because you have more and bigger seeds on that reduced structure. Pat, earlier, you referred to many crop wild relatives being under threat. And I'm wondering if you could expand on that, explain why they're under threat and also tell us why that matters. Ooh, yeah. Well, what comes to mind as a crop in a region under threat is the Middle East.

The fertile crescent of the Middle East. The Fertile Crescent of the Middle East, which goes from Israel into Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, that was the chickpeas and some vegetable crops all had their origin in that area. The threats, well, we know the Middle East, unfortunately, it's almost synonymous with war and violence. And so a place like Syria, for example, it would be nearly impossible for a plant geneticist to go in and try to collect some of the wild species. Likewise, for other countries, Iraq, parts of Iran would be impossible either politically or actually militarily to go in there. climate change, because even in a good year, they're pretty marginal for rainfall and have very high temperatures. So some of these wild relatives that might exist on the fringes and are holding on, maybe they would be pushed over the edge of their ability to survive. be pushed over the edge of their ability to survive. So, yeah, there's those threats. There are also threats that disease organisms, insects, insect pests are continually evolving.

continually evolving. And in some cases, they may be able to wipe out a wild population. So, you know, a whole range of threats. Why that's important is because these wild relatives potentially have the important genetic diversity that plant breeders are going to need into the future. We may not know what those traits are at this point because the future is unknown in many ways, but we know that the wild relatives are vastly more variable than our cultivated materials. And so chances are for any trait of interest that we might be looking for, if we look in the right way and we look hard enough, we may be able to find it in a wild accession. we may be able to find it in a wild accession. Right. Okay. So essentially, these crop wild relatives have played and could play an even greater role in the future in our plant breeding. They hold some importance. And I want to circle

back to that. But first, I think I want to tease apart what you just said about crop wild relatives holding more genetic diversity. So I might be generalizing a bit, but I will do so anyway. A lot of plant breeding tends to proceed from greater genetic diversity to less genetic diversity over time. Is that a fair statement? Yes, I think most people would agree with that. Okay, so I'd like you to explain that. When we think about teosinte to modern varieties of corn or any other examples you want to talk about, why is that?

Can you explain functionally how that tends to happen as we improve varieties for our purposes over time? Why do we end up with less genetic diversity? Okay, so if we think about T. ascenti, the corn ancestor existing over tens of thousands of square miles in Mexico and Central America, and a corresponding vastness of the genetic diversity, because each local habitat is going to have its particular genetic variants. But domestication happened in a through the so-called bottleneck

into domesticated maize in this case. Now at one point it was considered, you know, this very abrupt bottleneck effect. It's now viewed as, you know, maybe not quite so dramatic a reduction. But certainly when DNA profiles are compared between the diversity present in the wild and in the first primitive varieties, the land races, there was a reduction of diversity. And then from land races to modern cultivars. Also, another reduction in diversity. So it's just, I guess, a result of selection. just, I guess, a result of selection. That maybe when selection happens, maybe only 1% of the plants are selected to go to the next stage. And so over time, unless you really carefully try to manage that process,

you're going to get this reduced diversity. process, you're going to get this reduced diversity. Right. So just by virtue of the realities or the practicalities of saving seed over time, you're going to tend usually not to be dealing with the population sizes that you're selecting from that might occur in the wild. So that would be one source of declining diversity. Yeah, that's right. Maybe you know about this, Jordan.

The great wake-up call about reduced diversity was in 1970, 71. There was a major epidemic of a disease called southern corn leaf blight, a fungal disease, and a huge proportion of North American maize hybrids were susceptible to this disease. And it was realized that this was because in the hybrid production system based on a particular cytoplasm that was an extremely narrow genetic base. So this set off alarm bells. And ever since then, there have been attempts, you know, very direct attempts to increase the amount of diversity in our major crops. On the other hand, there is this continued emphasis on elite varieties. You know, we want the most productive, we want the most nutritionally beneficial crops. And so that tends kind of a tension and back and forth that breeders need to select

for the best, but they also need to maintain the diversity in their populations, both in order to make future progress in breeding and to avoid the kind of disaster that we had with that southern corn leaf blight. Right. And I was going to, you just, I was actually just, my follow-up question was going to be if another issue is just in our quest for predictability and uniformity, if that ends up contributing, because we don't especially earlier on perhaps we in our history we didn't fully understand that um i guess how how different genes interact or how in selecting for

one we might be inadvertently um like like uh canceling out or or eliminating others um because we're so focused i guess on phenotypes like on what we see on the corn rather than what might be happening at a more molecular level or kind of beyond what we can see, see, smell and taste and touch. Yeah. And, you know, now there's a lot of breeding does use genomic information. does use genomic information. So breeders, at least in some crops in some situations, have a more complete idea of the genetics. You know, they may select for greater traits, greater performance in a variety of traits, but they also need continually to bring in other sources of diversity. And whether that's cultivated diversity from other parts of the world Possibly wild relatives as well. But most breeders do try to have at least part of their programs strategically designed to incorporate diversity on an ongoing basis. pat what the the original question that led us to finding your book and to you and to inviting you to come on the podcast was was actually about land races because um i guess my production partner and

i wanted to understand a little better what land races are because we see it used slightly differently or defined differently in different contexts so i kind of wanted to spend a little bit asking you about land races and maybe we could start with the definition that most applies to this conversation. Can you tell us, you've touched on it already, but can you explain how land races kind of act as a bridge between crop wild relatives and the cultivars that are the result of, are very stabilized and are the result of like many, many, many years of breeding? Yeah. And you're right that there are different definitions of landrace, but the one that I find to be useful is landrace is a traditional variety,

Landrace is a traditional variety, often with low yield potential, but very well adapted to type of situation. Very resilient, maybe to drought or heat, for example. And food preferences as well. For example, in Mexico, people are very particular about the type of corn used for tamales or for tortillas or other dishes. So very well adapted to specific areas, but lower yield potential than what would be desired in modern productivity. Now, land races are almost always more diverse than domestic cultivars. And that is because pollination is not controlled. And so there's a lot of cross-pollination that happens among the plants, maybe within a field and then between neighboring fields. So there's a lot of genetic flux going on in these materials. And they were the sources of many of our productive materials we grow now. For corn hybrids, for example, were initially developed between two land races in the U.S. Corn Belt. So it started off very diverse and then, as we've already discussed over time, reduced. But now I think land races are being looked at again as a very fruitful potential source of variation.

Right. So it sounds to me like you're almost describing a continuum, really, and that land races kind of represent a medium point where we've domesticated a crop wild relative to a large extent, but there's still a higher level of diversity at that point. Beyond that point, we get into domesticated cultivars that are going to, you know, have been selected a lot more and be able to perform a lot better and produce the characteristics we want, but under more limited conditions, certain rates of fertilization, just less resilience. So I'm describing a continuum of decreasing genetic diversity, like we talked about before, or also just decreasing resilience, really, as we proceed down the line towards the cultivars, the domesticated cultivars we're planting. Do I have that about right?

Yeah, I would make the point that not all land races are going to be good performers and, you know, useful in breeding, but some will. So I think it's important that we conserve these because we never know what the traits are that we'll use. Now, sometimes heirlooms, that's another fuzzy term I'm sure you're familiar with. And some heirlooms would be land races. And I think among some members of the public, heirloom is considered universally to be a good trait. But there's some pretty crummy heirloom varieties out there, too. And you've probably seen these as well. So, you know, it's not to say there are not good heirlooms and we should be growing and conserving these, but they're not all going to be ones that we want to use in a breeding program. So just to wrap my head around this, I'm like, let me give you an example.

Ken, could a farm, I was later on in our conversation, I intended to ask you about how on farm farmers could be kind of interact with these ideas and perhaps put them into practice. And it's kind of hard to imagine a farmer directly working with crop wild relatives within the context of their own farm. But it's a little easier to imagine them doing so with land races. And so I'm wondering, is it like if I thought about, if I was, if I were interested in committing some years to developing a variety of corn for my farm ecosystem? And could I do so by intentionally taking two or three different cultivars and intermingling them with the intention

of cross-pollinating and then selecting over time? And in doing so, would that constitute developing a new land race for my farm? Like, can you either validate that or just poke holes in that idea? I'm just, I'm so interested in the idea of being able to apply these ideas on farm. Yeah, first of all, let me mention about using crop wild relatives. Yes, they can be very difficult. There's a lot of barriers and just practical reasons why it takes a dedicated researcher and very specific knowledge to know how to use a crop wild relatives. very specific knowledge to know how to use a crop wild relatives. But with land races, yes, and corn is a good example where it's easily cross-pollinated because the tassel and the silks are separate and you can certainly isolate the two and make cross-pollinations.

certainly isolate the two and make cross-pollinations. So it would be possible to do that. And an early form of selection was called mass selection. And that is simply selecting based on phenotype. It would be selecting like the best 10% of ears, for example, from a harvested pile of ears. which would be to try to do some replication of the ear. So not just select the ear, but take the ear and grow the kernels in replicated plots. replicated plots, okay, and record the traits of interest, and then select on that basis. So, not so much selecting on the basis of the phenotype of the ear per se of that ear. Okay. So that would be selecting on the ability of that ear to pass on its traits to its descendants. Okay. But Jordan, I know that there are farmers in the Midwest U.S. that have been very interested in this and developing their own open pollinated corn varieties. And there's also, I know, among some of our tribal communities, they have had an interest in conserving and improving some of their native varieties. So if you like, I could see if I could pass on some information or contacts about that.

That would be wonderful. So thanks for that, Pat. But let's get back to crop wild relatives then. You know, we've already touched on the importance they have played and can play, will play in improving our domesticated agricultural cultivars. So I'm just wondering if you could, I guess, expand on that a bit. I'm just interested in knowing in like, I guess, some examples of how scientists are working with them now um to to improve our our crops um and i guess also just like whether how easy or difficult that is it sounds like it would be difficult yeah well

there are some uh good success stories of using wild relatives um Tomato breeders tell me that virtually all disease resistance in modern tomato varieties comes from wild relatives. And there are many of these wild relatives of tomato growing in the Andes. And fortunately, they've been well collected and they're part of global germplasm systems. So tomato is a crop that you're undoubtedly aware can suffer from many diseases. And so those have been incorporated. example, is sunflower, where the ability to make hybrid sunflowers came from a wild relative. You know, and sunflower is one of the crops or species that can grow, or genera, I should say, that grows all through North America, from Canada all the way through to Mexico. And these have been collected as well.

It's interesting that most of the work to make modern domestic sunflowers didn't happen in North America, but in Russia. It was Russian plant breeders that selected sunflowers for the high oil trait that is so important now and for the ability to make hybrids. And so hybrid sunflowers is now the basis of our sunflower production. So from North America to Russia and Ukraine, and now back to North America, we're taking advantage of the global exchange of germplasm. And I guess that's a point that I would like to make is that it's so crucial to the future of agriculture that we maintain this system for international exchange. And unfortunately, there are certain things happening that are tending to reduce that exchange. But it's been very important in the past and will continue to be. And now one more example that I'll give is with wheat. There has been a new race of the pathogen that causes wheat stem rust, one of those very recurring diseases that have happened all throughout history. But a new race developed in East Africa in the 1990s.

And there's been attempts to look through germpl-based resistance came from a wild relative of wheat. So it was based on genomic information to actually identify the gene and the particular DNA sequence that was responsible for that resistance. So, yeah, researchers are employing more and more sophisticated techniques to try to pinpoint in crop wild relatives, not just genetic variation in general, but specifically what is it about the relevant gene that is causing the crop improvement. So there are lots of examples, many more as well, but I think it is important that we probably do a better job of documenting the success stories just to ensure continued funding and support for our germplasm systems. our germplasm systems. Maybe I'll try this, Pat. Maybe we can get at the importance with this question. This might be hard for you to answer, but maybe not. Are there any examples you can think of where we scientists are desperately trying to locate a crop wild relative because of a problem that's happening in a major crop right now and are struggling to either locate the relative itself

or just to isolate the trait that we need? Well, I know the traits or a problem that's causing a lot of anxiety in Colorado wheat production is wheat stem sawfly. And that's a problem. I think it extends into Canada. Certainly, it's important in Montana and Nebraska, Kansas, And there have been some examples of varieties identified that are somewhat better than others. But I still think the breeders would like to find a trait or a source of variation or resistance that is stronger than what they have now. And in order to do that, we need to make sure that we are able to access the genetics of our crop wild relatives. And we're rapidly running out of time together,

Pat, but maybe we could finish on, um, efforts to make sure we have access. So maybe you could briefly touch on, um, you know, in situ, in situ, uh, conservation and ex situ conservation, um, the difference between them and the pros and cons of each. the pros and cons of each. Right. So in situ conservation refers to maintaining that population so that it can continue to evolve. And in situ conservation also conserves not just the plant itself, but the associated microbes and pest organisms, you know, as an entire ecosystem. So that's in situ. And as we've already discussed, there are threats to that. Another type of in situ would be farmers in more traditional agricultural societies, for example, that continue to grow and conserve their local land races.

And I'm thinking in particular parts of Mexico and Central America where that's done with corn. XC2 refers to storing the seed or the other reproductive parts, either in a germplasm bank or a gene bank or in a botanic garden for living collections. Our gene banks are more secure in most cases than in situ. But there are problems involved with that as well. What you're collecting is just a snapshot in time, so it's not the continuing evolution of that population. It's not the continuing evolution of that population. And it can be difficult to regenerate the collection. A collection might be viable, say, for 25 or 50 years, but eventually would need to be regenerated.

And every time you do that regeneration, there's a risk that you would lose some of that variation, a process called genetic drift, where the genetics of that collection would change over time. are considered important and need support to continue those efforts. There is a global organization known as the Crop Trust. It's based in Germany, but it's very international, and they have taken on themselves the particular mission to help conserve crop wild relatives, especially in centers of origin and diversity of the world's important crops, and especially for parts of the world and national gene banking systems that are working with limited resources. So they're doing a tremendous job of trying to train people and to provide funding for both collection and maintenance of germplasm collections. All right. Well, I'll make sure in the show notes, Pat, that we link to the Crop Trust in case people want to learn more. Pat, I also wanted to ask you why crop relatives aren't used more or what barriers exist to them being used more to improve our

crops? Yeah, that's a good question, Jordan. One reason is simply biological, that the wild relatives might not be compatible in making a cross. Maybe they have different number of chromosomes, for example, or some other type of genetic barrier where you can try to make a cross, but in most cases, that wouldn't be successful without, you know, a very dedicated effort to get viable offspring. effort to get viable offspring. Another reason is known as linkage drag, and that refers to the fact that there could be some very valuable gene in a wild relative, let's say disease resistance, but it is linked genetically to a negative trait. You know, maybe it's bitterness, or maybe it is linked genetically to a negative trait. Maybe it's bitterness or maybe it is lodging or poor yield. So separating out the key benefits from the surrounding negative traits is a challenge. With DNA technology, that is becoming easier to do, but still it's a concern. Another problem has been just getting wild relatives to grow in a place. You know, most of our wild relatives are from more tropical latitudes. And when we try

to bring them into the U.S. and Canada to grow, you know, the day length is going to be completely different. They may not even flower. So there's a number of barriers. You know, most of these with enough effort can be overcome, but it's not trivial in most cases to use the wild relatives. But I think the benefits of conserving them are certainly clear and because we're going to need these genes someday. and because we're going to need these genes someday. Well, Dr. Patrick Byrne, I'm so glad that you made time to come on the show and tell us about this. I think it's a fascinating topic. And yeah, I look forward to learning more

about the Crop Trust myself. And I really encourage people to go and check that out and the ebook that you have for free online um once again um that's called crop wild relatives and their use in plant breeding and i learned a lot thanks so much dr burn okay you're welcome my pleasure jordan All right, and now for the segment that eases the pain. It's the Farmer Questionnaire. My name is Tracy Robertson. I'm the owner-operator of Stony Mountain Farm,

which is based in the South Caribou region of British Columbia. We recently relocated the farm from Squamish, so we were in Squamish for the last 14 years and moved up to the Caribou region in September 2021. We operate a mixed livestock farm. We produce laying hens for eggs, meat chickens, holiday turkeys, farrow to finish heritage pork, and we have a small herd of Icelandic sheep that are for fiber and lamb. We also will be producing our own hay this summer for the first time, so we're excited about that. What's one of your favorite breeds or cultivars? So being a livestock farmer, I'm going to go with breeds.

So my favorite breed is a Duroc wild boar pig, which we acquired from another farm friend of ours a couple years ago. She has been my most productive sow, best mom. I have two of her offspring who I feel like they have just kept my farm going with their small amounts of losses and large litters so that is my favorite breed of pig. Describe a common misconception about food production or what you do as a farmer. I feel a misconception for us comes from customers at the farmer's markets. As we sell eggs, we will show up with coolers full of eggs. And people are always curious about how many eggs we bring to market. And I feel like with that, people see how many we sell and will be like, oh, at $8 a dozen.

Oh, they're killing it. And I feel like a lot of people think that because we're busy or we have lineups at the market, that we're just killing it financially. And that is so not the truth. It's high production costs and low profitability. A lot of people see that food should be cheap and we have to charge what it costs us to produce it, plus a little bit to continue paying the mortgage. So it seems to be one of the things that often I feel like people just think that, you know, we're totally set financially and it couldn't be further away from the truth. Are there any do-overs you'd like for your farm business? The biggest thing that I wish I had done was go to school for agriculture because I didn't plan

on becoming a farmer. There's so many things that I wish I just had a different kind of background knowledge about and wasn't learning something from reading or YouTube that which are great sources. That's not what I'm saying. But I just wish I had a little bit more background. So that would be my biggest like, right from the get go is I wish I had gone to school to get more of a formal education for it. What's the best decision you ever made on your farm? So the best decision we ever made was we were previously located in Squamish British Columbia for 14 years. We outgrew our property, gosh, years ago. We were leasing property on another neighboring farm and the best decision I made was to sell that property and move to the caribou where we're now farming and we were able to purchase our ranch

and be able to get ourselves set up better than we were before. We were able to get some different equipment and we have way more land and we're all contained on one piece of property so that was the best thing I ever did for for the farm. What's your most challenging pest weed or predator and how do you manage it? The most challenging would be a predator for us and we've always had issues more with aerial predators than ground predators so eagles hawks ravens crows we just acquired some livestock guard dogs who will be going out to live with the poultry flock we're hoping that that will be enough to keep them away and sometimes the reflective tape has worked in the past to keep them away

but they're just savages sometimes. So last year when we were raising our Mistrala heritage meat chickens we let them out of the brooder at about four weeks of age and we lost we placed 400 chicks and I took to butcher 257. They were all lost to ravens who basically would take their heads off and then leave the carcass. And that was over an eight-week period. What's your worst habit on the farm? I'm a notorious procrastinator and will always find something if I if there's a job that I don't want to do I will find something else to take priority over it and that job will just sit there until it eventually gets done or

someone else does it. What's the most interesting book you've come across recently or podcast or film or television show? So recently we watched Clarkson Farm on Amazon Prime. And I actually really enjoyed it. Just seeing somebody, even though there's financial background there, go into farming and realizing how difficult it is. And in the last episode of the series, they were talking about all the subsidies that they were able to get and that the only profit without those subsidies they would have made was like something like 160 dollars and he said I don't understand how farmers are going to make it and I just felt like that comment it just shows the reality of how difficult this can be for farmers and to try and make a profit. Because at the end of the day, it's still a business. So it just, it really touched home to me

and inspired me a little bit that hopefully people will realize that it's not, you know, what's on Instagram and Facebook, that it's actually really difficult to have as a profession. Can you tell me about something in your business or on your farm that you've done that you're really proud of? It was purchasing this ranch. I felt for years I was watching. The community we lived in was going through drastic change. Things were coming to people and I felt very stagnant where I was.

And I had bigger desires for what I wanted to do, but it just wasn't happening for us. but it just wasn't happening for us. And in the summer, just things started to spiral and it happened. We moved the farm and now we're up here and it's just, I'm so proud that we actually did it. And a friend of mine did something very similar not farming but just a life change and she said that it was me that inspired her to make that life change because we took a total risk and moved everything five hours north and I still go down for my farmer farmers markets and keep my connection with my customers. But being able to have taken that step and be here and be inspiring other people to do stuff and take those leaps makes me really quite proud. Today I learned I don't need anything Okay, that's it for this episode, which was researched and co-produced by Philippa Menel.

Thanks, Pippa! Oh, and if you want to learn more about Dr. Patrick Byrne's work, or Cropwild Relatives in general, check out the show notes for this episode. We've got some links there that you'll want to check out. See you in two weeks, everyone. We're no closer, we never have laundry We'll owe nothing to this world of thieves

Live life like it was meant to be Aw, don't fret, honey, I've got a plan To make our final escape All we'll need is each other a hundred dollars And maybe a roll of duct tape And we'll run right outside of the city's reaches We'll live off chestnuts, spring water and peaches We'll owe nothing to this world of thieves And live life like it was meant to be Because why would we live in a place that don't want us

A place that is trying to bleed us dry We could be happy with life in the country With salt on our skin and the dirt on our hands I've been doing a lot of thinking Some real soul searching And here's my final resolve

I don't need a big old house Or some fancy car To keep my love going strong So we'll run right out Into the wilds and graces We'll keep close quarters With gentle faces And live next door

To the birds and the bees and live life like it was meant to be Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah,