Euphytica

, Volume 155, Issue 1–2, pp 225–234 | Cite as

Mode of inheritance of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) traits for tolerance to low soil phosphorus (P)

  • John Munji Kimani
  • Paul M. Kimani
  • S. Mwangi Githiri
  • J. W. Kimenju
Article

Abstract

Low soil phosphorus (P) has been singled out as a major constraint leading to perpetually low bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grain yield far below the expected yield potential. In developing countries beans are mainly produced by small-scale farmers who have little capacity to use inorganic fertilizers to replenish their soils. Yet bean production contributes significantly to their income and provides a cheap source of protein to rural and urban populations. The genetics of inheritance of the traits conferring low soil P tolerance is not well understood. The identification and understanding of the mode of inheritance of the traits for P-efficiency in bean will go along way in boosting bean yields through development of varieties adapted to low soil P. The objective of this study was to determine the inheritance of the traits conferring adaptation to low soil P, for the important large seeded red mottled bean market class. Three parents with known tolerance to low soil P were crossed with five adapted but non-tolerant genotypes in an 8 × 8 half diallel mating scheme. The resulting F1 seeds were evaluated under medium and low soil P conditions at two locations. Both general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) variances were highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) for all five characters studied except SCA variance for root dry weight at one location. The magnitude of GCA variance was up to twelve times higher than the SCA variance. The GCA:SCA ratio varied from 0.62 to 0.96 for the characters studied. The additive genetic variance was more important than the dominance variance for tolerance to low soil P.

Keywords

Basal root length Beans General combining ability Inheritance Low soil Phosphorus Yield 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The first author acknowledges the help of D. N. Maina and R. D. Macharia, at Kabete field station; University of Nairobi; and Mr. D. N. Njenga at National Horticultural Research Center, Thika for technical assistance. Funding of this research by University of Nairobi and partial funding by East and Central Africa Bean Research Network is also greatly appreciated.

References

  1. Baker RJ (1978) Issues in diallel analysis. Crop Sci 18:533–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Black CA (1995) Methods of soil analysis. Agronomy monograph No. 9 Part Two. Amer Soc Agronomy Madison, Wisconsin. USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouhmouch I, Souad-Mouhsine B, Brhada F, Aurag J (2005) Influence of host cultivars and Rhizobium species on the growth and symbiotic performance of Phaseolus vulgaris under salt stress. J Plant Physiol 162 (10):1103–1113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ceccarelli S (1994) Specific adaptation and breeding for marginal conditions. Euphytica 77:205–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CIAT (1987) Character improvement: developing solutions to major problems. 1. Soil Constraints. b. Low soil P and acid soils. Bean Program Annual Report 1984. Cali, Colombia, pp 72–76Google Scholar
  6. CIAT (1991) Pathology in Africa. CIAT Annual Report. Vol 12 No. 2. Cali Colombia, 385 pp Google Scholar
  7. CIAT (1995) Bean Program Annual Report, Working document No 163. CIAT, pp 74–81Google Scholar
  8. Carmi A, Heuer B (1981) The role of roots in the control of shoot growth in beans. Ann Bot 48:519–527Google Scholar
  9. Fawole I, Gerloff GC, Gabelman WH, Nordheim T (1982b) Genetic control of root development in beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown under phosphorus stress. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 107(1):98–100Google Scholar
  10. Flor CA, Thung MT (1989) Nutritional disorders. In: Schwartz HF, Pastor-corrales MA (eds) Bean production problems in the tropics. International Centre for Tropical Agriculture, Cali, Colombia, pp 726Google Scholar
  11. Fox PN, Crossa J, Romagosa I (1997) Multi-environment testing and genotype × environment interaction. In:Kempton RA (ed) Statistical methods for plant variety evaluation. 1st edn. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Griffing’s B (1956) Concepts of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing system. Aust J Biol Sci 9:463–493Google Scholar
  13. Jebara M, Mohamed EA, Payre H, Jean-Jacques D (2005) Nodule conductance varied among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under phosphorus deficiency. J Plant Physiol 162:309–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kimani JM (2002) Combining ability and heterosis for tolerance to low soil Phosphorus in common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). M. Sc. Thesis. Faculty of Agriculture, University of NairobiGoogle Scholar
  15. Lupwayi NZ, Mkandawire ABC (1996) Phosphorus, sulphur and molybdenum effect on response of Phaseolus beans to inoculation with Rhizobium in Malawi. African Crop Sci J 4:359–364Google Scholar
  16. Lynch J, Beebe SE (1995) Adaptation of beans to low P availability. HortScience 123:152–154Google Scholar
  17. Lynch J, Van Beem J (1993) Growth and architecture of seedling roots of common bean genotypes. Crop Sci 33:1253–1257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lynch J, Gonza´lez A, Tohma JM, Garcia JA (1992) Variation in characters related to leaf photosynthesis in wild bean populations. Crop Sci 32:633–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Michigan State University (1991) MSTATC-C, A Microcomputer Programme for the Design Management and Analysis of Agronomic Research Experiments. Michigan State University, Michigan, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. Miklas PN, Kelly JD, Beebe SE, Blair MW (2006) Common bean breeding for resistance against biotic and abiotic stresses: from classical to MAS breeding. Euphytica 147(1–2):105–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nelson WL, Mehlich A, Winters E (1995) The development, evaluation, and use of soil test for phosphorus availability. Agron 9:153–158Google Scholar
  22. Pandey S, Cebellos H, Magnavaca R, Vinasco LE (1994) Genetics of tolerance to soil acidity in tropical maize. Crop Sci 34:1511–1514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Singh KN, Santoshi US, Singh IB, Singh VS (1985) Combining ability and heterosis in peas. Crop Improvement 12:94–97Google Scholar
  24. Unite Nations Educational Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (1974) FAO-UNESCO Soil Map of the world: Volume VI. Africa. UNESCO, Paris, 299 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Stoddard FL, Balko C, Erskine W, Khan HR, Sarker A (2006) Screening techniques and sources of resistance to abiotic stresses in cool-season food legumes. Euphytica 147(1–2):167–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wortmann CS, Lunze L, Ochwoh VA, Lynch J (1995) Bean improvement for low soil fertility in Africa. African Crop Sci J 3:469–477Google Scholar
  27. Wortmann CS, Kirkby RA, Eledu CA, Allen DJ (1998) An atlas of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) production in Africa. Centro Internacionale de Agricultura Tropical, Cali, ColombiaGoogle Scholar
  28. Yan X, Lynch J, Beebe S (1995a) Genetic variation for phosphorus efficiency of common beans in contrasting soil type: I Vegetative response. Crop Sci 35:1086–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yan X, Lynch J, Beebe S (1995b) Genetic variation for phosphorus efficiency of common beans in contrasting soil type: II Yield response. Crop Sci 35:1094–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Munji Kimani
    • 1
  • Paul M. Kimani
    • 2
  • S. Mwangi Githiri
    • 2
  • J. W. Kimenju
    • 3
  1. 1.African Centre for Crop ImprovementUniversity of kwaZulu-NatalPietermaritzburgSouth Africa
  2. 2.Department of Plant Science and Crop ProtectionUniversity of NairobiNairobiKenya
  3. 3.Department of Crop ProtectionUniversity of NairobiNairobiKenya

Personalised recommendations