Advertisement

Euphytica

, Volume 94, Issue 3, pp 319–328 | Cite as

The introduction of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) into Western Europe and the phenotypic variation of dry beans collected in The Netherlands in 1946

  • A.C. Zeven
Article

Abstract

The first introduction of common bean from Central/South America into Western Europe most likely took place around 1500. The attractive bean seeds and their easy transportation warranted numerous additional introductions, not only from the Americas, but also from other areas where the common bean had been introduced. Bean seeds also must have been transported all over Europe both locally and internationally. Natural and human selection took place in and among introductions as well as in hybrid populations. Strong human selection may have led to pure garden forms which often occur in The Netherlands. In the period 1945–1948 a dry-bean collection of some 1500 accessions was made in The Netherlands. These have been classified into various criteria: 1. landraces, ‘primitive’ garden forms and cultivars, 2. (semi)climbing or bush types, 3. various seed colour types, including whitish, brownish, yellowish, black and variegated.

Phaseolus vulgaris common bean garden form landrace phenotypic variation The Netherlands 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amarger, N., M. Bours, F. Revoy, M.R. Allard & G. Laguerre, 1994. Rhizobium tropici nodulates field-grown Phaseolus vulgaris in France. Plant Soil 161: 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous, 1949. Rapport over het onderzoek aan landbouwstambonen in de jaren 1943, 1944, 1946, 1947 en 1948.Google Scholar
  3. Bontekoe, G.A., 1952. Een Zeeuwse volksplanting in de gemeente Borger. Nieuwe Drentsche Volksalmanak 70: 60–79.Google Scholar
  4. Brücher, H., 1988. The wild ancestor of Phaseolus vulgaris in South America, pp. 185–214. In: P. Gepts (Ed.) Genetic Resources of Phaseolus Beans. Kluwer. 613 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Camus, J., 1894. Les noms des plantes du Livre d'Heures d'Anne de Bretagne. J Bot 8: 325–335, 345–352, 366–375, 396–401.Google Scholar
  6. Debouck, D.G. & J. Smartt, 1995. Beans, Phaseolus spp. (Leguminosae-Papilionoideae). pp. 287–294. In: J. Smartt & N.W. Simmonds (Eds.) Evolution of Crops. Second ed. Longman. 531 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Dickson, M.H. & R. Petzoldt, 1988. Deleterious effects of white seed due to p gene in beans. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 113: 111–114.Google Scholar
  8. Dodonaeus, R., 1521. Medicinalium observationem. 240 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Dodonaeus, R., 1554. CruijdeBoeck. Antwerpen.Google Scholar
  10. Drijfhout, E., 1978. Genetic interactions between Phaseolus vulgaris and bean common mosaic virus. Wageningen. 98 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, A.M., 1973. Genetic improvement of Phaseolus vulgaris, pp. 107–115. In: M. Milner (Ed.) Nutritional Improvement of Food Legumes by Breeding. New York. 389 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Free, J.B., 1970. Insect pollination of crops. London/New York. 544 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Fuchs, L., 1542. Historia Stirpium, see Fuchs, 1543.Google Scholar
  14. Fuchs, L., 1543. Den Nieuwen herbarius. ca 550 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Gepts, P., 1988. A Middle American and an Andean common bean gene pool, pp. 375–390. In: P. Gepts (Ed.) Genetic Resources of Phaseolus Beans. Kluwer. 613 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Gepts, P. & F.A. Bliss, 1988. Dissemination pathways of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae) deduced from phaseolin electrophoretic variability. II. Europe and Africa. Econ Bot 42: 86–104.Google Scholar
  17. Gepts, P., T.C. Osborne, K. Rashka & F.A. Bliss, 1986. Electrophoretic analysis of phaseolin protein variability in wild forms and landraces of the common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L.: evidence for two centers of domestication. Econ Bot 40: 451–468.Google Scholar
  18. Gerlach, H.J.E., 1885. Landhuishoudkundige beschrijving van Walcheren. Haarlem. 94 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Van der Groen, Jan, 1669. Den Nederlandtsen hovenier. Reprint 1988, Utrecht. 179 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Nijdam, F.E., 1947. Rassen en vormen van landbouwstambonen, die ten behoeve van het eigen gebruik in Nederland worden verbouwd. Technische Berichten, Peulvruchten Studie Combinatie no 42. 10 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Powell, A.A., M. de A. Oliveira & S. Matthews, 1986. Seed vigour in cultivars of dwarf French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in relation to the colour of the testa. J Agric Sci, Cambridge 106: 419–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Prasad, K. & J.L. Weigle, 1976. Association of seed coat factors with resistance to Rhizoctonia solani in Phaseolus vulgaris. Phytopathology 66: 342–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. RLG, 1943. Rassenlijst voor Groentegewassen-1943. Bennekom.Google Scholar
  24. Roesslin, E., 1550. Kreuterbuch. Franckfurt am Meyn. 263 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Sauer, C.O., 1950. Cultivated plants of South and Central America, pp. 487–543. In: J.H. Steward (Ed.) Handbook of South American Indians, pt. 6. Washington. 715 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Singh, S., P. Gepts & D.G. Debouck, 1991. Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Econ Bot 45: 379–396.Google Scholar
  27. Singh, S.P. & A.J. Gutierrez, 1984. Geographical distribution of the D11 and D12 genes causing hybrid dwarfism in Phaseolus vulgaris L., their association with seed size, and their significance to breeding. Euphytica 33: 337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smartt, J., 1988. Morphological, physiological and biochemical changes in Phaseolus beans under domestication, pp. 143–161. In: P. Gepts (Ed.) Genetic Resources of Phaseolus Beans. Kluwer. 613 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Temple, S.R. & F.J. Morales, 1986. Linkage of dominant hypersensitive resistance to bean common mosaic virus to seed color in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Euphytica 35: 331–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wells, W.C., W.H. Isom & J.G. Waines, 1988. Outcrossing rates of six common bean lines. Crop Science 28: 177–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. White, J.W. & D.R. Laing, 1989. Photoperiod response of flowering in diverse genotypes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Field Crops Res 22: 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. White, J.W., S.P. Singh, C. Pino, M.J. Rios & I. Buddenhagen, 1992. Effects of seed size and photoperiod response on crop growth and yield of common bean. Field Crops Res 28: 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zeven, A.C., 1979. Collecting genetic resources in highly industrialized Europe, especially the Netherlands, pp. 49–58. In: A.C. Zeven & A.M. van Harten (Eds.) Broadening the Genetic Base of Crops. Wageningen. 347 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Zeven, A.C., J. Waninge, S.P. Singh & Th.J.L. van Hintum, in preparation Phenotypic variation and grouping of landraces, unimproved garden forms and improved cultivars of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) collected in the Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.C. Zeven
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant Breeding (I.v.P.)Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations