The Domestication Syndrome in Phaseolus Crop Plants: A Review of Two Key Domestication Traits
Plant domestication can be seen as a long-term experiment that involves a complex interplay among demographic processes and evolutionary forces. Long-standing questions about plant domestication are the number of times a species was domesticated, the extent of the domestication bottleneck, and the genetic basis of adaptive processes. Crops such as Phaseolus beans offer an excellent opportunity to answer these questions, especially the ones related to the genetic basis of the adaptive domestication syndrome. In the genus Phaseolus, five species have been domesticated: the common bean (P. vulgaris), the runner bean (P. coccineus), the tepary bean (P. acutifolius), the year bean (P. dumosus) and the Lima bean (P. Lunatus). These five species were domesticated in seven independent events that resulted in phenotypic convergence for several traits of the domestication syndrome. Two of these traits, namely reduced pod shattering and increased seed weight, are of special interest due to their role in the initial adaptation of these species during domestication. The objective of the present study was to review current evidence about (1) the effects of domestication on phenotypic variation of these two domestication traits in Phaseolus beans to understand whether adaptation led to clear-cut differences among wild and domestic forms or to a phenotypic continuum, and (2) the genetic basis of these two traits in Phaseolus beans to understand whether phenotypic convergence has been driven by parallel or convergent evolution. Research on these subjects in Phaseolus beans has been very scarce, and areas in need of urgent development are highlighted in this review.
KeywordsPod shattering Seed weight Phenotypic convergence
The present study was partially funded by Colciencias, Colombia, under contract number 009-2015 and project code 1101-658-42502.
Acknowledgements Thanks are due to the Genetic Resources Unit of CIAT, especially to Dr. Daniel Debouck and Dr. Peter Wenzl, for providing the Lima bean seed material used in this study and for all their support in the phenotypic characterization of pod shattering in Lima bean. Thanks are also due to Paola Hurtado for sharing unpublished pod shattering data in Lima bean.
- Abbo S, Pinhasi van-Oss R, Gopher A, Saranga Y, Ofner I, Peleg Z (2014) Plant domestication versus crop evolution: a conceptual framework for cereals and grain legumes. Trends Plant Sci 19:351–360Google Scholar
- Andueza-Noh RH, Serrano-Serrano ML, Sánchez MIC, del Pino IS, Camacho-Pérez L, Coello-Coello J, Cortes JM, Debouck DG, Martínez-Castillo J (2013) Multiple domestications of the Mesoamerican gene pool of Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.): evidence from chloroplast DNA sequences. Genet Resour Crop Evol 60:1069–1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bitocchi E, Bellucci E, Giardini A, Rau D, Rodriguez M, Biagetti E, Santilocchi R, Spagnoletti Zeuli P, Gioia T, Logozzo G, Attene G, Nanni L, Papa R (2012) Molecular analysis of the parallel domestication of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in Mesoamerica and the Andes. New Phytol 197:300–313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Freytag GF, Debouck DG (2002) Taxonomy, distribution, and ecology of the genus Phaseolus (Leguminosae–Papilionoideae) in North America, Mexico, and Central America. Botanical Research Institute, Fort Worth, TXGoogle Scholar
- Gepts P, Debouck D (1991) Origin, domestication, and evolution of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, L.). In: van Schoonhoven A, Voysest O (eds) Common beans: research for crop improvement. United Kingdom, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International, Wallingford, pp 7–53Google Scholar
- Gujaria-Verma N, Ramsay L, Sharpe AG, Sanderson L-A, Debouck DG, Tar’an B, Bett KE (2016) Gene-based SNP discovery in tepary bean (Phaseolus acutifolius) and common bean (P. vulgaris) for diversity analysis and comparative mapping. BMC Genomics 17:239Google Scholar
- Harlan JR (1992) Crops & man, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Inc., Crop Science Society of America Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USAGoogle Scholar
- Murgia ML, Attene G, Rodriguez M, Bitocchi E, Bellucci E, Fois D, Nanni L, Gioia T, Albani DM, Papa R, Rau D (2017) A comprehensive phenotypic investigation of the “pod-shattering syndrome” in common bean. Front Plant Scie 8:251Google Scholar
- Park SO, Coyne DP, Jung G, Skroch PW, Arnaud-Santana E, Steadman JR, Ariyarathne HM, Nienhuis J (2000) Mapping of QTL for seed size and shape traits in common bean. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 125:466–475Google Scholar
- Schinkel C, Gepts P (1988) Phaseolin Diversity in the Tepary Bean, Phaseolus acutifolius A. Gray. Plant Breeding 101:292–301Google Scholar
- Schmutz J, McClean PE, Mamidi S, Wu GA, Cannon SB, Grimwood J, Jenkins J, Shu S, Song Q, Chavarro C, Torres-Torres M, Geffroy V, Moghaddam SM, Gao D, Abernathy B, Barry K, Blair M, Brick MA, Chovatia M, Gepts P, Goodstein DM, Gonzales M, Hellsten U, Hyten DL, Jia G, Kelly JD, Kudrna D, Lee R, Richard MMS, Miklas PN, Osorno JM, Rodrigues J, Thareau V, Urrea CA, Wang M, Yu Y, Zhang M, Wing RA, Cregan PB, Rokhsar DS, Jackson SA (2014) A reference genome for common bean and genome-wide analysis of dual domestications. Nat Genet 46:707–713CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Singh J, Gustin J, Baier J, Settles AM, Vallejos E (2014) Mapping QTLs for seed weight, starch and protein content in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). In: International plant and animal genome conference XXII San Diego, USAGoogle Scholar
- Zohary D, Hopf M (2000) Domestication of plants in the Old World, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York, 316 ppGoogle Scholar