Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 81, Issue 6, pp 806–811

DNA restriction fragment length polymorphisms correlate with isozyme diversity in Phaseolus vulgaris L.

  • C. D. Chase
  • V. M. Ortega
  • C. E. Vallejos


Genetic variation in Phaseolus vulgaris L. (P. vulgaris) was investigated at the isozyme and DNA levels. We constructed a library of size-selected Pst I clones of P. vulgaris nuclear DNA. Clones from this library were used to examine 14 P. vulgaris accessions for restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs). DNAs from each accession were analyzed with three restriction enzymes and 18 single copy probes. The same accessions were also examined for variability at 16 isozyme loci. Accessions included four representatives of the T phaseolin group and five representatives each of the C and S phaseolin groups. One member of the S group (the breeding line XR-235-1-1) was derived from a cross between P. vulgaris and P. coccineus. Isozymes and RFLPs revealed very similar patterns of genetic variation. Little variation was observed among accessions with C and T phaseolin types or among those with the S phaseolin type. However, both isozyme and RFLP data grouped accessions with S phaseolin separately from those accessions with C or T phaseolin. The highest degree of polymorphism was observed between XR-235-1-1 and members of the C/T group. RFLP markers will supplement isozymes, increasing the number of polymorphic loci that can be analyzed in breeding, genetic, and evolutionary studies of Phaseolus.

Key words

Common bean Molecular markers Phaseolin Phaseolus coccineus Gene pools 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bassiri A, Adams MW (1978a) An electrophoretic survey of seedling isozymes in several Phaseolus species. Euphytica 27:447–459Google Scholar
  2. Bassiri A, Adams MW (1978b) Evaluation of common bean cultivar relationships by means of isozyme electrophoretic patterns. Euphytica 27:707–720Google Scholar
  3. Beckman JS, Soller M (1986) Restriction fragment length polymorphisms and genetic improvement of agricultural species. Euphytica 35:111–124Google Scholar
  4. Brown JWS, McFerson JR, Bliss FA, Hall TC (1982) Genetic divergence among commercial classes of Phaseolus vulgaris in relation to phaseolin pattern. Hort Science 17:752–754Google Scholar
  5. Burr B, Burr FA, Thompson KH, Albertson MC, Stuber CW (1988) Gene mapping with recombinant inbreds in maize. Genetics 118:519–526PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng SS, Bassett MJ, Quesenberry KH (1981) Cytogenetic analysis of interspecific hybrids between common bean and scarlet runner bean. Crop Sci 21:75–79Google Scholar
  7. Church GM, Gilbert W (1984) Genomic sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:1991–1995PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Coyne DP (1964) Species hybridization in Phaseolus. J. Hered 55:5–6Google Scholar
  9. Dellaporta SL, Wood J, Hicks J (1983) Maize DNA minipreps. Maize Genet Coop Newsl 57:26–27Google Scholar
  10. Evola SV, Burr FA, Burr B (1986) The suitability of restriction fragment length polymorphisms as genetic markers in maize. Theor Appl Genet 71:765–771Google Scholar
  11. Feinberg AP, Vogelstein B (1984) A technique for radiolabeling DNA restriction fragments to high specific activity. Anal Biochem 137:266–269PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Freytag GF, Bassett MJ, Zapata M (1982) Registration of XR-235–1–1 bean germ plasm. Crop Sci 22:1268–1269Google Scholar
  13. Gepts P, Bliss FA (1985) F1 hybrid weakness in the common bean. J Hered 76:447–450Google Scholar
  14. Gepts P, Bliss FA (1986) Phaseolin variability among wild and cultivated common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) from Colombia. Econ Bot 40:469–478Google Scholar
  15. Gepts P, Osborn TC, Rashka K, Bliss FA (1986) Phaseolin protein variability in wild forms and landraces of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris); evidence for multiple centers of domestication. Econ Bot 40:451–468Google Scholar
  16. Hamrick JL, Linhart YB, Mitton JB (1979) Relationships between life history characteristics and electrophoretically detectable genetic variation in plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 10:173–200Google Scholar
  17. Hanahan D (1983) Studies on transformation of Escherichia coli with plasmids. J Mol Biol 166:557–580PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Helentjaris T, Burr B (eds) (1989) Development and application of molecular markers to problems in plant genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor/NY, 165 ppGoogle Scholar
  19. Helentjaris T, King G, Slocum M, Siedenstrang C, Wegman S (1985) Restriction fragment polymorphisms as probes for plant diversity and their development as tools for applied plant breeding. Plant Mol Biol 5:109–118Google Scholar
  20. Helentjaris T, Slocum M, Wright S, Schaefer A, Nienhuis J (1986) Construction of genetic linkage maps in maize and tomato using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Theor Appl Genet 72:761–769Google Scholar
  21. Helentjaris T, Weber D, Wright S (1988) Identification of the genomic locations of duplicate nucleotide sequence in maize by analysis of restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Genetics 188:353–363Google Scholar
  22. Kislev N, Rubenstein I (1980) Utility of ethidium bromide in the extraction from whole plants of high-molecular-weight maize DNA. Plant Physiol 66:1140–1143Google Scholar
  23. Koenig R, Gepts P (1989) Allozyme diversity in wild Phaseolus vulgaris: further evidence for two major centers of genetic diversity. Theor appl Genet 78:809–817Google Scholar
  24. Lonsdale DM, Thompson RD, Hodge TP (1981) The integrated forms of the S1 and S2 DNA elements of maize male-sterile DNA are flanked by a large repeated sequence. Nucleic Acids Res 9:3657–3669Google Scholar
  25. Loveless MD, Hamrick JL (1984) Ecological determinants of genetic structure in plant populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15:65–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nei M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:3321–3323Google Scholar
  27. Rick CM, Fobes JF, Holle M (1977) Genetic variation in Lycopersicon pimpinellifolium: evidence of evolutionary change in mating systems. Plant Syst Evol 127:139–170Google Scholar
  28. Rick CM, Fobes JF, Tanksley SD (1979) Evolution of mating systems in Lycopersicon hirsutum as deduced from genetic variation in electrophoretic and morphological characters. Plant Syst Evol 132:279–298Google Scholar
  29. Romero-Andreas J, Bliss FA (1985) Heritable variation in the phaseolin protein of nondomesticated common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. Theor Appl Genet 71:478–480Google Scholar
  30. Shii CT, Rabakoarihanta A, Mok MC, Mok DWS (1982) Embryo development in reciprocal crosses of Phaseolus vulgaris L. and P. coccineus Lam. Theor Appl Genet 62:59–64Google Scholar
  31. Smartt J (1970) Interspecific hybridization between cultivated American species of the genus Phaseolus. Euphytica 19:480–489Google Scholar
  32. Sneath PHA, Sokal R (1973) Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco/CAGoogle Scholar
  33. Southern EM (1975) Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. J Mol Biol 98:503–517PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Sullivan JG, Freytag G (1986) Predicting interspecific compatibilities in beans (Phaseolus) by seed protein electrophoresis. Euphytica 35:201–209Google Scholar
  35. Vallejos CE, Chase CD (1991) Linkage between isozyme markers and a locus affecting seed size in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Theor Appl Genet 81:413–419Google Scholar
  36. Vieria J, Messing J (1982) The pUC plasmids, an M13mp7-derived system for insertion mutagenesis and sequencing with synthetic universal primers. Gene 19:259–268Google Scholar
  37. Weeden NF (1984) Distinguishing among white-seeded bean cultivars by means of allozyme genotypes. Euphytica 33:199–208Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. D. Chase
    • 1
  • V. M. Ortega
    • 1
  • C. E. Vallejos
    • 1
  1. 1.Vegetable Crops DepartmentUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations