Variation, Taxonomy, Domestication, and Germplasm Potentialities in Phaseoluscoccineus

  • Alfonso Delgado Salinas
Part of the Current Plant Science and Biotechnology in Agriculture book series (PSBA, volume 6)


Based on archaeological evidence, information included in the pre-hispanic codices (Hernández X. et al., 1979), and data recorded on herbarium specimens, Phaseolus coccineus L. cultivation in Mexico has diminished considerably since the Spanish conquest. Today, the two cultigens of P. coccineus (P. coccineus subsp. coccineus and P. coccineus subsp. darwinianus Hdez. X. and Miranda C.) are grown only in 13 states of Mexico, in Guatemala, and to a lesser degree in the rest of Central America. Both cultigens are also grown on a small scale by different ethnic groups in South America (Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru), where P. coccineus subsp. darwinianus appears to be more popular than P. coccineus subsp. coccineus. In Argentina, P. coccineus subsp. coccineus is cultivated as an ornamental as well as for its edible seeds. The technology most commonly used in these countries involves cooperative labor, the use of traditional farm implements, and in dependence of non-local inputs of energy and chemicals. In countries of Europe and Africa, as well as in the United States, P. coccineus subsp. coccineus has been grown for its pods (as a green pod crop) and for dry seeds. Also it is valued as an ornamental plant because of its dazzling inflorescences.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alefeld, F.G.C. 1866. Landwirtschaftliche Flora. Berlin. (Wiegandt & Hempel).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arias, L.M. 1980. Relación entre agrohabitats y variantes del complejo Phaseolus coccineus L. en la Mesa Central de Chiapas, Mex. Tesis profesional. Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos, Mexico.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baggett, J.R. and W.A. Frazier. 1959. Disease resistance in the runner bean, Phaseolus coccineus L. Pl. Dis. Reporter 43:137–143.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bailey, L.H. 1923. Cultigens and transfers in nomenclature. Gentes Herb. 1:121–125.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baldi, G. and F. Salamini. 1973. Variability of essential aminoacid content in seeds of 22 Phaseolus species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 43:75–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Batall, M.A., D. Ramirez, D., and I. Rivera M. 1942. In: F. Hernández. Historia de las plantas de la Nueva España, emprenta Universitaria México. Vol. 1. pp. 200.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berlin, G., D.E. Breedlove, and P.H. Raven. 1974. Principles of Tzeltal Plant Classification. Academic Press. New York and Lond.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blackwall, F.L.C. 1971. Pod-seeding and yield in the runner bean (Phaseolus coccineus L.). Bull. Nat. Inst. Agric. Bot. 12:45–56.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Berglund-Brücher, O., and H. Brücher. 1974. Murutungo eine semi-domestisierte Wildbohne (Phaseolus flavescens Piper) aus der tropischen Gebirgen Sudamerikas. Angew. Botanik 48:208–220.Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    Bressani, R.R. and L.G. Elias. 1980. Nutritional value of legume crops for humans and animals. In: R.J. Summerfield and A.H. Bunting (eds.), Advances in Legume Science. R. Bot. Gardens Kew, England, 1978: pp. 135–156.Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    Búrquez, A. 1979. Biología floral de poblaciones silvestres y cultivadas de Phaseolus coccineus L. Tesis profesional de Biologo. Facultad de Ciencias, U.N.A.M., Mexico.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    Búrquez, A., and J. Sarukhán. 1980. Biologia floral de poblaciones silvestres de Phaseolus coccineus L. I. Relaciones planta-polinizador. Bol. Soc. Bot. México 39:5–25.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Bye, R. 1976. Ethnoecology of the Tarahumara of Chihuahua, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    Cárdenas, F. 1984. Clasificación preliminar de los frijoles en México. Folleto Técnico 81. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agricolas, SARH. Mexico. 59 pp.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Casimir, J., and G. LeMarchand. 1966. Répartition et importance systématique des acides aminés et des peptides libres des Phaseolinae. Bull. Jard. Bot. Etat. Brux. 36:53–56.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Coyne, D.P., and M.C. Schuster. 1980. Bacterial diseases of Legumes: Breeding and Resistance. In: R.J. Summerfield and A.H. Bunting (eds.), Advances in Legume Science. R. Bot. Gardens Kew, Ingland, 1978: pp. 225–234.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Crispin, A., J.A. Sifuentes A., and J. Campos Avila. 1976. Enfermedades y plagas del frijol en México. Folleto de Divulgación No. 39. (la. Reimpresión, corregida y aumentada) Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agricolas, SAG. Mexico. 42 pp.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Darwin, C. 1858. On the agency of bees on the fertilization of papilionaceous flowers and on the crossing of kidney beans. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 2:459–465.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    Darwin, C. 1876. The effects of cross and self-fertilization in the vegetable kingdom. J. Murray, London.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    De Candolle, A.P. 1825. Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabilis. Vol. 2:342.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    Delgado, S.A. 1985. Systematics of the genus Phaseolus (Leguminosae) in Mexico and Central America. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Duke, J.A. 1981. Handbook of legumes of world economic importance. Plenum Press. New York, U.S.A. 345 pp.Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    Engleman, E.M. 1979. Anatomía y Morfología. In: E. Mark Engleman (ed.), Contribuciones al conocimiento del frijol (Phaseolus) en Mexico. Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mexico, pp. 23–37.Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Fernandez, P. 1980. Ciclos de vida comparativos de poblaciones de Phaseolus coccineus L. (Leguminosae). Tesis Doctoral, Facultad de Ciencias, UNAM, Mexico.Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    Flannery, K.V. 1973. The origins of agriculture. Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 2:271–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 27.
    Free, J.B. 1966. The pollination of the beans Phaseolus multiflorus and Phaseolus vulgaris by honeybees. J. Apic. Res. 5:87–91.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    Free, J.B. 1968. The behaviour of bees visiting runner beans (Phaseolus multiflorus). J. Appl. Ecol. 5:631–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 29.
    Frere, M., J. Rea, and J.Q. Rijks. 1975. Estudio Agroclimatoiógico de la zona andina (informe técnico). FAO (UNESCO), OMM ROMA. 361 pp.Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    Freytag, G. 1965. Clasificación del frijol comun (Phaseolus vulgaris y especies afines). Ceiba 11:51–63.Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Galinier, J. 1979. N’ y u h u Les Indiens Otomis. Etudes Mesoamericaines. Serie II. Mission Archéologique et ethnologique Française au Mexique. Mexico, D.F. 615 pp.Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    Gonzalez, E.A., and E.M. Engleman. 1982. Anatomía de la vaina de Phaseolus coccineus. Agrociencia 48:7–28.Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    Harlan, J.R., and J.M.J. de Wet. 1971. Towards a rational classification of cultivated plants. Taxon. 20:509–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 34.
    Hernandez, X.E., 1985. Exploración etnobotánica y su metodología. In: Xolocotzia, obras de Efraim Hernandez Xolocotzi. Tomo 1. Revista de Geografía Agrícola, Universidad Autonoma Chapingo, Chapingo, Mexico. pp. 162–188.Google Scholar
  34. 35.
    Hernández, X.E., S. Miranda-Colín and C. Prywer. 1959. El origen de Phaseolus coccineus L. subsp. darwinianus Hdez. X. and Miranda C., subsp. nova. Rev. Soc. Mex. Hist. Nat. 20:99–121.Google Scholar
  35. 36.
    Hernández S.E., and M.L. Espin. 1977. Evolución bajo domesticacion del complejo P. coccineus L. en Mexico. In: Avances en la Ensenanza y la Investigación 1976–1977. Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mex. pp. 23–24.Google Scholar
  36. 37.
    Hernández, X.E., and A. Ramos R. 1977. Metodología para el estudio de agroecosistemas con persistencia de tecnología agricola tradicional. In: E. Hernández X. (ed.) Agroecosistemas de México: Contribución a la enseñanza, investigación y divulgación agrícola. Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mexico, pp. 321–333.Google Scholar
  37. 38.
    Hernandez, X.E., A. Ramos R., and M.A. Martínez A. 1979. Etnobotánica. In: E. Mark Engleman (ed.) Contribuciones al Conocimiento del frijol (Phaseolus) en Mexico .Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mexico, pp. 113–140.Google Scholar
  38. 39.
    Heslop-Harrison, J., and Y. Heslop-Harrison. 1984. Stigma organization and the control of fertilization in Phaseolus. In: R. Reimann-Philipp (ed.), Proc. on Eucarpia Meeting on Phaseolus Bean Breeding held in Hamburg, 1983.Google Scholar
  39. 40.
    Ibrahim, A.M., and D.P. Coyne. 1975. Genetics of stigma shape, cotyledon position and flower color in reciprocal crosses between P. vulgaris and P. coccineus and implications in breeding. J. Amer. 3Toc. Hort. Sci. 100:622–626.Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    Johnson, C. 1983. Ecosystematics of Acanthoscelides (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) of Southern Mexico and Central America. Misc. Publ, of the Entomological Soc. of America (IMPEAAL) 56:1–370.Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    Kalin-Arroyo, M.T. 1981. Breeding systems and pollination biology in Leguminosae. In: R.M. Polhill and P.H. Raven (eds.) Advances in Legume Systematics. Vol. 2. Proceedings of the International Legume Conference, Kew, England, 1978: pp. 723–769.Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    Kaplan, L. and R.S. MacNeish. 1960. Prehistoric bean remains from caves in the Ocampo region of Tamaulipas, Mexico. Bot. Mus. Leafl. 19:33–56.Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    Kaplan, L. 1965. Archaeological and domestication in American Phaseolus (Beans). Econ. Bot. 49:358–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 457.
    Kaplan, L. 1967. Archaeological Phaseolus from Tehuacán, Chapt. 10. In: D.S. Byers (ed.) Vol. 1. Environment and Subsistence. The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley. Univ. Texas Press, Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
  45. 46.
    Kruger, J., G.M. Hoffman, and N. Hubbeling. 1977. The kappa race of Colletotrichum lindermuthianum and sources of resistance to anthracnose in Phaseolus beans. Euphytica 26:23–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 47.
    Kunth, S. 1824. In: Humboldt, Bonpland and Kunth. Nova genera et species plantarum. Vol. 6. pp. 449–450.Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    Laughlin, R.M. 1975. The Great Tzotzil Dictionary of San Lorenzo Zinacantan. Smithsonian Institute Press. Washington D.C. Smithsonian Contr. to Anthropology 19. 597 pp.Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    LeMarchand, G. 1971. Observations sur quelques hybrides dans le genre Phaseolus. I. Le problems des incompatibilités interspécifiques. Bull. Rech. Agron. Gembloux 6:441–452.Google Scholar
  49. 50.
    Macfadyen, G. 1837. Flora of Jamaica. Longman, Orme, Brown, Green and Longmans. London.Google Scholar
  50. 51.
    Manshardt, R.M., and M.J. Bassett. 1984. Inheritance of stigma position in Phaseolus vulgaris x P. coccineus hybrid populations. J. Heredity 7:45–50.Google Scholar
  51. 52.
    Maréchal, R. 1971. Observations sur quelques hybrides dans le genre Phaseolus. II. Les phenomenes meiotiques. Bull. Rech. Agron. Gembloux 6:461–489.Google Scholar
  52. 53.
    Maréchal, R., J. Mascherpa, and F. Stainier. 1978. Etude taxonomique d’un groupe complexe d’espèces des genres Phaseolus et Vigna (Papilionaceae) sur la base de donées morphologiques et polliniques, traitées par l’analyse informatique. Boissiera 28:1–273.Google Scholar
  53. 54.
    Martínez-Romero, E. 1985. Reiteración de las secuencias de nitrogenasa y especificidad de Rhizobium para nodular y fijar nitrogeno en Phaseolus vulgaris. Tesis doctoral CCH, Centro de Investigación sobre Fijacion del Nitrogeno, UNAM.Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    Miranda, S. 1967. Infiltración genética entre P. coccineus L. y P. vulgaris L. Colegio de Postgraduados, Serv. Inv. 9. Chapingo, Mexico.Google Scholar
  55. 56.
    Nabhan, G., C.W. Weker, and J.W. Berry. 1985. Variation in composition of Hopi Indian beans. Ecology of Food and Nutrition 16:135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 57.
    National Academy of Sciences. 1979. Tropical Legumes: resources for the future. National Academy of Sciences. Washington, D.C., U.S.A.Google Scholar
  57. 58.
    Ockendon, D.J., and L. Currah. 1982. Inbreeding depression in runner beans (Phaseolus coccineus L.). Crop Res. (Hort. Res.) 22:19–26.Google Scholar
  58. 59.
    Ortega, D., M.L., C. Rodríguez, and E. Hernández X. 1976. Análisis químico de 68 genotipos del género Phaseolus cultivados en México. Agrociencia 23:23–42.Google Scholar
  59. 60.
    Pennington, C.W. 1963. The Tarahumara of Mexico. Their environmental and material culture. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 267 pp.Google Scholar
  60. 61.
    Pennington, C.W. 1969. The Tepehuan of Chihuahua. Their material culture. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 413 pp.Google Scholar
  61. 62.
    Piper, C.V. 1926. Studies in American Phaseolineae. Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 22:663–701.Google Scholar
  62. 63.
    Provvidenti, R., and M.H. Dickson. 1981. Kelvedon Marvel: a multi-resistant cultivar of Phaseolus coccineus L. Ann. Rep. Bean Improv. Coop. 24:124–125.Google Scholar
  63. 64.
    Pusztai, A., R.R.D. Croy, G. Grant, and J.C. Stewart. 1983. Seed lectins: distribution, location and biological role. In: J. Daussant, J. Moss and J. Vaughan (eds.) Seed Protein: Academic Press. Ann. Proced. of the Phytochemical Soc. of Europe 20:53–82.Google Scholar
  64. 65.
    Ramos, R.A., E. Hernandez X., and J. Kohashi. 1976. Estudio de la tecnología agrícola tradicional en la Sierra de Puebla. I. Asociación maiz y frijol. In: Avances en la Enseñanza y la Investigación 1975–1976. Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mexico, pp. 11–13.Google Scholar
  65. 66.
    Reyes, J.J.E., and J. Kohashi. 1978. Efecto de la densidad de población en el rendimiento y sus componentes en un frijol de guía y “ayocote” (P. coccineus L.) cultivados con espaldara. In: Avances en la Enseñanza y en Investigación 1977–1978. Colegio de Postgraduados, Chapingo, Mexico.Google Scholar
  66. 67.
    Smartt, J. 1970. Interspecific hybridization between cultivated American species of the Phaseolus. Euphytica 19:480–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 68.
    Smartt, J. 1973. The possible status of Phaseolus coccineus L. ssp. darwinianus Hdez. X. and Miranda C. as a distinct species and cultigen of the genus Phaseolus. Euphytica 22:424–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 69.
    Smartt, J. 1976. Tropical Pulses. Longman, London, Great Britain. 348 pp.Google Scholar
  69. 70.
    Smartt, J. 1979. Interspecific hybridization in the grain legumes -a review. Econ. Bot. 33:329–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 71.
    Sousa, M.S., and M.P. de Sousa. 1981. New World Lonchocarpinae. In: R.M. Polhill and P.H. Raven (eds.) Advances in Legume Systematics. Vol. I. Proceedings of the International Legume Conference at Kew, England, 1978: pp. 261–281.Google Scholar
  71. 72.
    Wall, J.R. 1970. Experimental introgression in the genus Phaseolus. I. Effect of mating systems on interspecific gene flow. Evolution 24:356–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 73.
    Webster, B.D., R.M. Ross, and M.C. Sigourney. 1980. A morphological study of the development of reproductive structures of Phaseolus coccineus. Lam. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 105:825–833.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfonso Delgado Salinas

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations