Full Length Research Paper
ABSTRACT
A field experiment was conducted at Department of Agricultural Research in Sebele in the 2012 to 2013 season using nine accessions that were sourced from the National Plant Genetic Resource Centre (NPGRC), Gaborone, Botswana. Multivariate statistical procedures such as clusters and principal component analysis were used on 15 selected characters to assess agro-morphological variability among tepary bean landraces collected in Botswana. Few characters were statistically significant which suggest lower genetic diversity among the Botswana tepary beans. The first three PCA accounted for 77.12% of accumulated variation. Traits which revealed significant contribution to variation among accessions were number of leaves, plant spread, pod width, 100 seed weight and seeds per pod. The dendrogram results also showed that these characters contributed significantly to the grouping of accessions into three clusters. Three accessions GK011, MTS (Motsumi) and GK012 were separated from the rest of the accessions. However, GK012 and MTS (Motsumi) with highest number of valuable traits are recommended for plant breeders to use as parents in future breeding programs.
Key words: Tepary bean, agro-morphological traits, dendrogram, principal components analysis, multivariate analysis.
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
A summary of the results for the mean, range and variances for the 15 characters are presented in Table 2. Number of branches per plant, 100 seed weight and number of seeds per pod were significant at P < 0.05% probability level while the rest of the characters were not significant. This is an indication of low genetic variability among the traits analyzed for the selected accessions. However, large ranges were observed among some traits, such as in yield m2 (48 to 254 g), number of seeds per plant (49 to 189), number of leaves per plant (43 to 121) and pod weight per plant (10 to 36 g).
The results presented in Table 2, revealed that accessions GK012 had highest plant height (353 mm), number of leaves (96), plant spread (437 mm) and yield m2 (178 g). Accession GK011 had the lowest plant height (261 mm), number of leaves (45), number of pods per plant (17), number of seeds per plant (65) and yield per m2 (74 g) and exhibited a dwarf plant character. Based on cluster analysis (Figure 1) at a demarcated line of coefficient 0.97 the accessions were grouped into three clusters. Cluster 1 and 3 consists of single accessions MTS (Motsumi) and GK011 respectively. The rest of the accessions are grouped in cluster 2, but accession GK012 is separated from the rest of these accessions. The selected traits were not able to distinguish between (E89 and E19) and between (GK010 and E70). A higher genetic difference of 0.69 was observed between the accessions (E89 and E19) at 0.55 and 1.24 of GK011. However, generally a lower difference among most of the accessions was recorded (Figure 1). The dendrogram indicates that the population is mainly influenced by the characters with greater variability.
The Principal component analysis was performed to reveal the phenotypic diversity among the genotypes to identify characters that account for most of the variances. The first three principal components gave an accumulated total variation of 77.12% (Table 3).
Axis 1 with 37.89% variability had most contributions coming from no of branches (0.345), number of leaves (0.347) and plant spread (0.301). The second variate from axis 2 had higher contributions coming from pod width (0.575), 100 seed weight (0.590), and seeds per pod (-0.377). This indicates the importance of these characters in identifying tepary bean landraces. Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) clearly demarcated landraces GK011 and MTS (Motsumi) from the rest of the accessions; it also distinguished GK012 from the rest of the accessions better than cluster analysis (Figure 2).
DISCUSSION
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
Abebe TD, Bauer AM, Leon J (2010). Morphological diversity of Ethiopian barleys (Hordeum vulgare L.) in relation to geographic regions and altitudes. Hereditas 147:154-164. Crossref |
||||
Amarteifio JO, Moholo O (1998). The chemical composition of four legumes consumed in Botswana. J. Food Compos. Anal. 11:329-332. Crossref |
||||
Azam-Ali SN, Sesay A, Karikari SK, Massawe FJ, Aguilar-Manjarrez J, Bannayan M, Hampson KJ (2001). Assessing the potential of underutilized crop- a case of bambara groundnut. Experimental Agriculture 37:433-472. Crossref |
||||
Botswana Agricultural Marketing Board (2013). Marketing season. |
||||
Bhardwj HL, Rangappa M, Hamama AA (2002). Planting date and genotype effects on Tepary bean productivity. HortScience 37:317-318 | ||||
Bhardwaj HL, Hamama AA (2004). Protein and mineral composition of tepary bean seed. HortScience 39:1363-1365.
|
||||
Carvalho MA, Quesenberry KH (2009). Morphological characterization of the USA Arachis pintoi Krap. and Greg. Collection. Plant. Syst. Evol. 277:1-11 Crossref |
||||
de Lima MS, de Souza Carneiro JE, Carneiro PCS, Pereira CS, Vieira RF, Cecon PR (2012). Characterization of genetic variability among common bean genotypes by morphological descriptors. Crop Breed. Appl. Biotechnol. 12:76-84. Crossref |
||||
Ghafoor A, Ahmad Z, Qureshi AS, Bashir M (2002). Genetic relationship in Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper and V. radiata (L.) R. Wilczek based on morphological traits and SDS-PAGE. Euphytica 123:367-378.
Hintum TJL, Brown AHD, Spillane C, Hodgkin T (2000). Core collection of plant genetic resources. IPGRI Technical Bulletin No. 3. |
||||
International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, IBPGR (1985). Rome, Italy International IBPGR, Phaseolus acutifolius, Secretariat Rome, Italy.
|
||||
Karikari SK, Wigglesworth DJ, Kwerepe BC, Balole TV, Sebolai B, Munthali DC (1995). Country report for Botswana. In: Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 9. Proceedings of the workshop on conservation and improvement of bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. Verdc.) 14-16 November, 1995, Harare, Zimbabwe, pp. 11-18. (Eds. Heller J., Begemann F and Mashunga J. International Plant Resource Institute, Rome, Italy. | ||||
Kovach W (2006). MVSP-Multivariate Statistical Package version 3.1 Kovach Computing Services; Anglesey. | ||||
Kuruvadi S, Valdez IS (1993). Range of yield components and phenotypic correlations in tepary beans (Phaseolus acutifolius) under dryland conditions. pp. 594-596. In: J. Janick and J.E. Simon (eds.), New crops. Wiley, New York. | ||||
Markhart AH (1985). Comparative water relations of Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Phaseolus acutifolius Gray, Plant Physiol. 77:113-117 | ||||
Miklas NP, Stavely JR (1998). Incomplete dominance of rust resistance in tepary bean, Hort Sci. 33:143-145.
|
||||
Manyasa EO, Silim SN, Githiri SM, Christiansen JL (2008). Diversity in Tanzanian pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] Landraces and their response to environments. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 55:379-387. | ||||
Mohamed F, Mohamed M, Schmitz-Eiberger N, Keutgen, Noga G (2005). Comparative drought postponing and tolerance potentials of two tepary bean lines in relation to seed yield. Afr. Crop Sci. 13:49-60. | ||||
Mohammadi SA, Prasanna BM (2003). Analysis of genetic diversity in crop plants- Salient statistical tools and considerations. Crop Sci 43: 1235 -1248. Crossref |
||||
Moukoumbi YD, Sié M, Vodouhe R, N'dri B, Toulou B, Ogunbayo SA, Ahanchede A (2011). Assessing phenotypic diversity of interspecific rice varieties using agro-morphological characterization. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 5:74-86. | ||||
Nabham GP, Felger RS (1978). Teparies in southwestern North America. Econ. Bot. 32:2-19. | ||||
Porch TG, Beaver JS, Brick MA (2012). Registration of Tepary Germplasm with Multiple-Stress Tolerance, TARS-Tep 22 and TARS-Tep 32. J. Plant Registrat. 7:358-364 Crossref |
||||
Porch TG, Beaver JS, Debouck DG, Jackson SA, Kelly JD, Dempewolf H (2013). Use of wild relatives and closely related species to adapt common bean to climate change. Agronomy 3:433-461. Crossref |
||||
Rao I, Beebee S, Polania J, Ricaurte J, Cajiao C, Garcia R, Riverra M (2013). Can tepary bean be a model for improvement of drought resistance in common bean? Afr. Crop Sci. J. 21:265-281.
|
||||
SAS 9.2 (2010). SAS/GRAPH, 9.2 Reference, Second Edition, Cary, NC: SAS Institute | ||||
Rohlf FJ (2000). NTSYS-pc Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis system version 2.1, Applied Biostatistics, New York. | ||||
Salgado MO, Schwartz HF, Brick MA, Pastor Corrales MA (1994). Resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp phaseoli in tepary beans (Phaseolus acutifolius). Plant Dis. 78:357-360. Crossref |
||||
Smith JSC, Smith OS (1992). Fingerprinting crop varieties. Adv. Agron. 47:85-140. Crossref |
||||
Schinkel C, Gepts P (1988). Phaseolin diversity in the Tepary bean, Phaseolus acutifolius A. Gray. Plant Breed. 101: 292-301. Crossref |
||||
Tinsley AM, Scheerens JC, Alegbejo JO, Adan F, Krumhar KC, Butler LE, Kopplin MJ (1985). Tepary beans (Phaseolus acutifolius var. latifolius): A potential food source for African and Middle Eastern cultures. Qual Plant Foods Nutr. 35:87-101 Crossref |
Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0