Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-08T12:38:14.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of different Ethiopian common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris (Fabaceae) genotypes for host resistance to the Mexican bean weevil, Zabrotes subfasciatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2017

Shiferaw G. Tigist ,
Rob Melis ,
Julia Sibiya  and
Gemechu Keneni
Shiferaw G. Tigist*
Affiliation:
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Melkassa Agricultural Research Centre, PO Box 430, Adama, Ethiopia
Rob Melis
Affiliation:
University of KwaZulu-Natal, African Centre for Crop Improvement, Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
Julia Sibiya
Affiliation:
University of KwaZulu-Natal, African Centre for Crop Improvement, Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
Gemechu Keneni
Affiliation:
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Holeta Agricultural Research Centre, PO Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
*
*E-mail: tshiferaw2006@gmail.com
Get access

Abstract

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is amongst the most important grain legume crops in Africa in general, and Ethiopia in particular. The Mexican been weevil (Zabrotes subfasciatus Boheman) heavily attacks the grain of common bean. A total of 300 common bean entries were subjected to a ‘no-choice’ test at Melkassa Agricultural Research Centre, Ethiopia, using a randomized complete block design with three replications, to evaluate for resistance to the Mexican bean weevil. Data on insect and seed traits were collected and a significant level (P<0.01) of variation in all parameters measured was observed amongst genotypes. Relative resistance was recorded in landraces, improved genotypes and breeding lines, but the resistant genotypes, RAZ-11, RAZ-36, RAZ-2, RAZ-44, RAZ-120, RAZ-40 and MAZ-203, showed consistently complete resistance, with zero index of susceptibility value. Two other promising entries were also identified from the breeding lines (SCR-11) and landrace collections (NC-16) of Ethiopia. Stratified ranking diagrams showed that accessions from different eco-geographical origins in Ethiopia and those with different colours showed different patterns of response to infestation. The Ethiopian bean breeding programme should take up the resistant genotypes for a comprehensive yield trial at the national level and direct release them as commercial varieties. The incorporation of bean weevil resistance genes into adapted varieties through backcross breeding techniques, supported with marker assisted selection, seems to be the best strategy not only in terms of time saving but also in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.

Keywords

Common beanPhaseolus vulgarisMexican bean weevilZabrotes subfasciatushost plant resistance
Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 1 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © icipe 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abate, T. and Ampofo, J. K. O. (1996) Insect pests of beans in Africa: their ecology and management. Annual Review of Entomology 41, 45–73.Google Scholar
Acosta-Gallegos, J. A., Kelly, J. D. and Gepts, P. (2008) Pre-breeding in common bean and use of genetic diversity from wild germplasm. Crop Science 47, S44–S59.Google Scholar
Acosta-Gallegos, J. A., Quintero, C., Vargas, J., Toro, O., Tohme, J. and Cardona, C. (1998) A new variant of arcelin in wild common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L., from southern Mexico. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 45, 235–242.Google Scholar
Asfaw, A., Blair, M. and Conny, A. (2009) Genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces from the East African highlands. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 120, 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s00122-009-1154-7.Google Scholar
Aslam, M. (2004) Pest status of stored chickpea beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis Linnaeus on chickpea. Journal of Entomology 1, 28–33.Google Scholar
Assefa, T. M. (2010) Selection for drought and bruchid resistance of common bean populations. PhD Thesis, University of Padova, Italy.Google Scholar
Beneke, C. J. (2010) The expression and inheritance of resistance to Acanthoscelides obtectus (Bruchidae) in South African dry bean cultivars. Msc Thesis, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.Google Scholar
Cardona, C. (1989) Insects and other invertebrate pests in Latin America and their constraints, pp. 505–571. In Bean Production Problems in the Tropics 2 edn. (edited by Schwartz, H. F. and Pastor-Corrales, M. A.). CIAT, Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
Cardona, C. (2004) Common beans: Latin America, pp. 145–150. In Crop Post-Harvest: Science and Technology Durables (edited by Rick, H. and Graham, F.). Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Cardona, C. and Kornegay, J. (1999) Bean germplasm resources for insect resistance, pp. 85–99. In Global Plant Genetic Resources for Insect Resistant Crops (edited by Clement, S. and Quisenberry, S.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
Cardona, C., Kornegay, J., Posso, C. E., Morales, F. and Ramirez, H. (1990) Comparative value of four arcelin variants in the development of dry bean lines resistant to the Mexican bean weevil. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 56, 197–206.Google Scholar
Cardona, C., Posso, C., Kornegay, J. L., Valor, J. and Serano, M. (1989) Antibiosis effects of wild dry bean accessions on the Mexican bean weevil and the bean weevil (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 82, 310–315.Google Scholar
CSA (Central Statistics Authority) (2014) Report on area and production of crops: Agricultural sample survey on private peasant holdings of 2014/2015 meher season. Statistical Bulletin Ethiopia Series. Central Statistics Authority, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
De Morais, A. A. and Pinheiro, J. B. (2012) Breeding for resistance to insect pests of stored grain, pp. 127–135. In Plant Breeding for Biotic Stress Resistance (edited by Fritsche-Neto, R. and Borém, A.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Dobie, P. (1974) The laboratory assessment of the inherent susceptibility of maize varieties to post-harvest infestation by Sitophilus zeamais Motsch. (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Journal of Stored Products Research 10, 183–197.Google Scholar
Dobie, P. (1977) The contribution of the Tropical Stored Products Center to the study of insect resistance in stored maize. Tropical Stored Products Information 34, 7–22.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT (2012) The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: The statistical database [Online]. Available at http://faostat.fao.org Google Scholar
Fox, P. N., Skovmand, B., Thompson, B. K., Braun, H.-J. and Cormier, R. (1990) Yield and adaptation of hexaploid spring triticale. Euphytica 47, 57–64.Google Scholar
Getu, E., Ibrahim, A. and Iticha, F. (2003) Review of lowland pulse insect pest research in Ethiopia. Proceedings of Grain Legume Workshop, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 22−27 September 2003. Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Haile, A. (2006) On-farm storage studies on sorghum and chickpea in Eritrea. African Journal of Biotechnology 5, 1537–1544.Google Scholar
Harmsen, R. (1989) Bruchid resistance and agronomic traits of cultivated bean lines (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) containing arcelin seed protein alleles from wild beans. PhD Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA.Google Scholar
Harmsen, R., Bliss, F. A., Cardona, C., Posso, C. E. and Osborn, T. C. (1987) Transferring genes for arcelin protein from wild to cultivated beans: implications for bruchids resistance, pp. 54–55. In Bean Improvement Cooperative (BIC) Annual Report, vol. 31. Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences, Michigan State University, MI, USA.Google Scholar
Hartweck, L. M., Cardona, C. and Osborn, T. C. (1997) Bruchid resistance of common bean lines having an altered seed protein composition. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 95, 1018–1023.Google Scholar
Herridge, D. F. and Danso, S. K. A. (1995) Enhancing crop legume N2 fixation through selection and breeding. Plant Soil 174, 51–82.Google Scholar
Kananji, G. A. D. (2007) A study of bruchid resistance and its inheritance in Malawian dry bean germplasm. PhD Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
Katungi, E., Farrow, A., Chianu, J., Sperling, L. and Beebe, S. (2009) Common Bean in Eastern and Southern Africa: A Situation and Outlook Analysis. International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Kampala, Uganda. 61 pp.Google Scholar
Keneni, G., Bekele, E., Getu, E., Imtiaz, M., Mulatu, B. and Dagne, K. (2011) Breeding food legumes for resistance to storage insect pests: Potential and limitations. Sustainability 3, 1399–1415.Google Scholar
Kiula, B. A. and Karel, A. K. (1985) Effectiveness of vegetable oils and other plant products in protecting beans against Mexican bean weevil (Zabrotes subfasciatus) (Boheman), pp. 3–5. In Bean Improvement Cooperative (BIC) Annual Report, vol. 28. Bean Improvment Cooperation (BIC), New York.Google Scholar
Liao, M., Hocking, P. J., Dong, B., Delhaize, E., Richardson, A. E. and Ryan, P. R. (2008) Variation in early phosphorus-uptake efficiency among wheat genotypes grown on two contrasting Australian soils. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59, 157–166.Google Scholar
McClean, P. E., Lavin, M., Gepts, P. and Jackson, S. A. (2008) Phaseolus vulgaris: a diploid model for soybean, pp. 55–76. In Genetics and Genomics of Soybean (edited by Stacey, G.). Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Minitab, Inc. (2010) Statistical Software Language Pack English Version 16.1.1.1. Minitab, Inc., PA, USA.Google Scholar
Minney, B. H. P., Gatehouse, A. M., Dobie, P., Dendy, J., Cardona, C. and Gatehouse, J. A. (1990) Biochemical bases of seed resistance to Zabrotes subfasciatus (bean weevil) in Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean): a mechanism for arcelin toxicity. Journal of Insect Physiology 36, 757–761, 763–767.Google Scholar
Myers, J. R., Davis, J., Kean, D., Nchimbi-Msolla, S. and Misangu, R. (2001) Backcross breeding to introduce arcelin alleles into improved African bean cultivars. Proceedings of the Bean Seed Workshop, Arusha, Tanzania, 12–14 January 2001. Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research Support Program, East Africa. 8 pp.Google Scholar
Nchimbi-Msolla, , S. and Misangu, R. N. (2002) Seasonal distribution of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) bruchid species in selected areas in Tanzania. In Proceedings of the Bean Seed Workshop, Arusha, Tanzania, 12–14 January 2001. Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research Support Program, East Africa. 5 pp.Google Scholar
Negasi, F. (1994) Studies on the economic importance and control of bean bruchids in haricot bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L., in eastern and southern Shewa. Msc Thesis, Alemaya University of Agriculture, Alemaya, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Negasi, F. and Abate, T. (1992) Progress in bruchid management, pp. 144–149. In Proceedings of the Third SADC/CIAT Bean Research Workshop, Mbebane, Swaziland, 5–7 October 1992. CIAT Africa Workshop Series No. 27.Google Scholar
Odagiu, A. and Porca, M. (2003) The influence of chemical composition of different origin beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) on tolerance to the bean weevil (Acanthoscelides obtectus Say) stroke. Journal of Central European Agriculture 4, 13–22.Google Scholar
Ofuya, T. I. and Credland, P. F. (1996) The ability of Bruchidius atrolineatus (Pic) (Coleoptera, Bruchidae) to infest and damage seeds of different tropical legumes. Journal of Stored Products Research 32, 323–328.Google Scholar
Osborn, T. C., Burow, M. and Bliss, F. A. (1988) Purification and characterization of arcelin seed protein from common bean. Plant Physiology 86, 399–405.Google Scholar
Parsons, D. M. J. and Credland, P. F. (2003) Determinants of oviposition in Acanthoscelides obtectus: a nonconformist bruchid. Physiological Entomology 28, 221–231.Google Scholar
Paul, U. V., Lossini, J. S., Edwards, P. J. and Hilbeck, A. (2009) Effectiveness of products from four locally grown plants for the management of Acanthoscelides obtectus (Say) and Zabrotes subfasciatus (Boheman) (both Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in stored beans under laboratory and farm conditions in Northern Tanzania. Journal of Stored Products Research 45, 97–107.Google Scholar
Redden, R. J. and McGuire, J. (1983) The genetic evaluation of bruchid resistance in a seed of cowpea. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 34, 707–715.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2003) SAS/STAT Users guide 9.2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Schoonhoven, A. V. and Cardona, C. (1986) Main Insect Pests of Stored Beans and Their Control; Study Guide to be Used as a Supplement to the Audio Tutorial Unit on the Same Topic. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Colombia.Google Scholar
Schoonhoven, A. V., Cardona, C. and Valor, J. (1983) Resistance to the bean weevil and the Mexican bean weevil (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in noncultivated common bean accessions. Journal of Economic Entomology 76, 1255–1259.Google Scholar
Shaheen, F. A., Khaliq, A. and Aslam, M. (2006) Resistance of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars against pulse beetle. Pakistan Journal of Botany 38, 1237–1244.Google Scholar
Shaun, F., Paschall, M., Seville, D., Legesse, D. and Gure, K. (2012) Dried beans in Ethiopia: increasing food security through trade. Case study series. International Institute for Environment and Development/Sustainable Food Lab. 8 pp. Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/16035IIED.pdf? Google Scholar
Shiferaw, T. (2004) Management of bean bruchids, Zabrotes subfasciatus Boheman (Coleoptera: Bruchidae), on haricot bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) using botanicals and host resistance. MSc Thesis, Alemaya University of Agriculture, Alemaya, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Singh, B. B. and Singh, S. R. (1992) Breeding for bruchid resistance in cowpea. Research Report No. 5. The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria. pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
Singh, P. (2001) Numerical Problems in Plant Breeding and Genetics. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India. ISBN-8127221402.Google Scholar
Tadesse, A., Amare, A., Emana, G. and Tadele, T. (2008) Review of research on post-harvest pests, pp. 475–562. In Increasing Crop Production Through Improved Plant Protection (edited by Tadesse, A.). PPSE and EIAR, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Teixeira, I. R. V. and Zucoloto, F. S. (2003) Seed suitability and oviposition behaviour of wild and selected populations of Zabrotes subfasciatus (Boheman) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) on different hosts. Journal of Stored Products Research 39, 131–140.Google Scholar
Uebersax, M. A., Kim, J.-N. and Chung, Y.-S. (1996) Packaging and handling systems for dry edible beans. Michigan Dry Bean Digest 20 (2), 5–13.Google Scholar
Velten, G., Rott, A. S., Petit, B. J. C., Cardona, C. and Dorn, S. (2008) Improved bruchid management through favorable host plant traits and natural enemies. Biological Control 47, 133–140.Google Scholar
Wortmann, C. S., Kirkby, R. A., Eledu, C. A. and Allen, D. J. (1998) Atlas of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Production in Africa. CIAT publication no. 297. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) Cali, Colombia. 131 pp.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Tigist et al. supplementary material

Annex 1 and 2

Download Tigist et al. supplementary material(File)
File 84.8 KB