American Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering

Submit a Manuscript

Publishing with us to make your research visible to the widest possible audience.

Propose a Special Issue

Building a community of authors and readers to discuss the latest research and develop new ideas.

Research Article |

Characterization of Morphological Traits in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Landraces Collected from Ethiopia at Jimma

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) also known as haricot bean, snap bean, navey bean, and kidney bean. It is seed propagated and true diploid (2n = 22). Low yield is a major problem of common bean in Ethiopia. So, the morphological characterization of common bean landrace is essential to improve yield and yield related character through selection. The objective of this study was to characterize Common bean of landraces collected from different parts of Ethiopia. In this study, one hundred common bean landraces were evaluated in simple lattice design at Jimma Agricultural Research Center, Melko. Considerable variation in plant growth habit, Type-II (indeterminate bush) was the most prevalent among the accessions (55%), followed by Type-I (determinate bush) (45%) growth habits. The percentage frequencies of the qualitative classes varied from 4%-84%. The Hꞌ values varied from 0.190 for pod beak position to 0.642 for seed color. Characters with wide phenotypic diversity index was observed in seed color (Hꞌ=0.642) seed coat color (Hꞌ= 0.624), pod color (Hꞌ=0.622), and seed shape (Hꞌ=0.582) indicating widely diversified for these characters. On the other hand, pod beak position (Hꞌ=0.190) showed relatively the lowest diversity. The high diversity of bean landraces observed in this study, is in part due to farmer’s customary seed exchanges. Frequent mutations and genetic recombination are the other possible causes of high diversity of the bean landraces studied. In general, this study showed that the collection has a relatively important diversity. This genetic diversity can be exploited in improvement programmes. However, the present result based on morphological alone can’t make definite conclusion. As a result, it is recommended that molecular and other quality traits like protein content studies have to be carried out.

Common Bean, Diversity, Landrace, Qualitative Traits

APA Style

Mesera, E., Alamerew, S., Amsalu, B., Shifaraw, G. (2024). Characterization of Morphological Traits in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Landraces Collected from Ethiopia at Jimma. American Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 12(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.bio.20241201.11

ACS Style

Mesera, E.; Alamerew, S.; Amsalu, B.; Shifaraw, G. Characterization of Morphological Traits in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Landraces Collected from Ethiopia at Jimma. Am. J. BioSci. Bioeng. 2024, 12(1), 1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.bio.20241201.11

AMA Style

Mesera E, Alamerew S, Amsalu B, Shifaraw G. Characterization of Morphological Traits in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Landraces Collected from Ethiopia at Jimma. Am J BioSci Bioeng. 2024;12(1):1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.bio.20241201.11

Copyright © 2024 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. Asfaw, Asrat, Matthew W. Blair, and Conny Almekinders. "Genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Landraces from the East African highlands." Theoretical and Applied Genetics 120, no. 1 (2009): 1-12.
2. Freytag, G. F., Debouck, D. G. (2002). Taxonomy, distribution, andecology of the genus Phaseolus (Leguminosae-Papilionoideae) in North America, Mexico and Central America. Bot. Res. Inst. Of Texas, Brit. Press, Ft. Worth, TX.
3. Ferreira, J. J., E. Alvarez, M. A. Fueyo, A. Roca, and R. Giraldez. "Determination of the outcrossing rate of Phaseolus vulgaris L. using seed protein markers." Euphytica 113, no. 3 (2000): 257-261.
4. Coelho RC, Faria MA, Rocha J, Reis A, Oliveira MBPP, Nunes E (2009). Assessing genetic variability in germplasm of Phaseolus vulgaris L collected in Northern Portugal. Scientia Horticulturae 122(3): 333-338. correlation in Soya bean and their implication in selection. Agronomy J 47: 477-483.
5. Central Statistics Agency (CSA). (2016). Report on area and production of major crops. Vol. I, Addis Ababa Ethiopia.
6. Kermah M, Franke AC, Adjei-Nsiah S, Ahiabor B, Abaidoo RC, Giller KE. N2-fixation and N contribution by grain legumes under different soil fertility status and cropping systems in the Guinea savanna of northern Ghana. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2018; 261: 201–10.
7. Israel DW (1987) Investigation of the role of phosphorus in symbiotic dinitrogen fixation. Plant Physiology 84, 835–840.
8. Singh, S. P. and Urrea, C. A., 1995. Inter-and intraracial hybridization and selection for seed yield in early generations of common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. Euphytica, 81(2), pp. 131-137.
9. Stoilova, T. and Pereira, G., 2013. Assessment of the genetic diversity in a germplasm collection of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) using morphological traits. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 8(2), pp. 208-215.
10. Karaagac O, Balkaya A (2013). Interspecific hybridization and hybrid seed yield of winter squash (Cucurbita maxima Duch) and pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duch) lines for rootstock breeding. Scientia Horticulturae 149: 9-12.
11. Bode D, Elezi F, Gixhari B. 2013. Morphological characterization and interrelationships among descriSilva HT (2005) Descritores mínimos indicados para caracterizar cultivares/variedades de feijão comum (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) 2005. Embrapa Arroz e Feijão, Santo Antônio de Goiás, 32pptors in Phaseolus vulgaris accessions. Agr. Forest., 59(2): 175-185.
12. Silva HT (2005) Descritores mínimos indicados para caracterizar cultivares/variedades defeijão comum (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Embrapa Arroz e Feijão, Santo Antônio de Goiás, 32p. (Documentos 184).
13. IBPGR 2002. Descriptors for Phaseolus coccineus. IBPGR, Rome.
14. Fisseha, Z., Tesfaye, K., Dagne, K., Blair, M. W., Harvey, J., Kyallo, M. and Gepts, P., 2016. Genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) germplasm of Ethiopia as revealed by microsatellite markers. African Journal of Biotechnology, 15(52), pp. 2824-2847.
15. Shannon W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press; 1949.
16. Hennink, S. and Zeven, A. C. 1991. The interpretation of Nei and Shannon-Weaver within population variation indices. Euphytica 51: 235-240.
17. Okii D., Tukamuhabwa P., Kami J., Namayanja A., Paparu P., Ugen M. and Gepts P. 2014. The genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm in Uganda. Afr. J. Biotechno. 29: 2935-2949.
18. Burle, L., Fonseca, J. R., Peloso, M., Melo, L., Temple, S. R., Gepts, P. (2011). Integrating phenotypic evaluations with a molecular diversity assessment of a Brazilian collection of common bean landraces. Crop Sci., 51: 2668–2680.
19. Bareke, T., Asfaw, Z., Woldu, Z., Medvecky, B. A. and Amsalu, B. 2016. Landrace diversity of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L., Fabaceae) in Oromia and SNNP Regions, Ethiopia. M. SC thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
20. Berhane, M., Asfaw, Z., Woldu, Z. and Amsalu, B. 2017. Diversity in farmers’ varieties (Landraces) of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L., Fabaceae) in South Wollo and East Gojjam Zones of Amhara Region, Ethiopia. M. Sc Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
21. Blair MW, Laura FG, Paul M, Louis B (2010) Genetic diversity, inter-gene pool introgression and nutritional quality of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from Central Africa. Theor Appl Genet 121: 237–248.
22. CIAT. 2005. Utilisation of bean genetic diversity in Africa. Highlights of CIAT in Africa. No. 21. Cali. Colombia.
23. David, S. and Sperling, L. 1999. Improving technology delivery mechanisms: Lessons from bean seed systems research in Eastern and Central Africa. Agric Hum Values 16: 381- 388.