alexa Resistance Levels to Root Rot and Angular Leaf Spot Diseases in Selected High Iron Bean Genotypes | Open Access Journals
ISSN: 2329-8863
Advances in Crop Science and Technology
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Resistance Levels to Root Rot and Angular Leaf Spot Diseases in Selected High Iron Bean Genotypes

Mukamuhirwa F1,2*, Mukankusi MC3, Tusiime G1, Butar L2, Musoni A2, Ngaboyisonga C2, Gahakwa D2, Gibson P1 and Kelly K1

1Department of Agricultural production, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

2Rwanda Agriculture Board, Kigali, Rwanda

3CIAT Africa, National Agricultural Research laboratories-Kawanda, Kampala, Uganda

*Corresponding Author:
Floride Mukamuhirwa
Department of Agricultural production
MakerereUniversity, PO Box-7062, Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +250788633110
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: April 04, 2017; Accepted date: April 20, 2017; Published date: April 27, 2017

Citation: Mukamuhirwa F, Mukankusi MC, Tusiime G, Butar L, Musoni A, et al.(2017) Resistance Levels to Root Rot and Angular Leaf Spot Diseases in Selected High Iron Bean Genotypes. Adv Crop Sci Tech 5:274. doi: 10.4172/2329-8863.1000274

Copyright: © 2017 Mukamuhirwa F, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Advances in Crop Science and Technology

Abstract

Common bean production is constrained by different diseases the major ones being, Angular Leaf Spot (ALS), bean root rot, anthracnose, Common Bright Bacteria (CBB), Bean Common Cosaic Virus (BCMV) and Bean Common Mosaic Necrotic Virus, (BCMNV). The aim of this study was to identify new and better sources of broad resistance to both bean ALS and Root Rot diseases among nutritional bean varieties. Fifty seven varieties were planted in the screen house of CIAT Africa based at Kawanda Agricultural Research Laboratories Institute (KARL). Virulent inocula actually used at CIAT were used to test these genotypes. Different varieties were resistant to specific isolates but interestingly, only ACC 714 contained broad resistance to both Andean and MesoAmerican isolates of bean Angular Leaf Spot as well as Fusarium root rot and Pythium root rot at mean, median and mode basis. Since different nutritional bean varieties have varying levels of resistance to different pathogens, it may be possible to pyramid these resistance genes into appropriate background so as to provide durable resistance in biofortified bean genotypes higher in iron and zinc content.

Keywords

Nutritional bean varieties; Pathogens; Resistance; Iron content

Introduction

Biofortification, a practice of enhancing contents of minerals with nutritional significance in food products is regarded as one of the cheap approaches to improve human nutrition [1,2]. Traditionally, crops have been mostly improved for agronomic traits and to a lesser extent for pest and disease resistance. Biofortification is only a recent practice. The most limiting micronutrients in the diets of the rural and urban poor in Rwanda and Uganda are Fe and Zn, resulting into anemia and depressed immunity, respectively [3]. Efforts have been made in this study to breed for increased Fe and Zn in common beans in Rwanda and Uganda. However, successful deployment of high Fe and Zn common beans in both countries will require that such varieties are high yielding but also resistant to some of the most important diseases. The interaction of disease borne pathogens with the crop-bio system complicates the demonstration of superior genotypes across environments, and thus it results into scale or rank shift of trait performance. The bean root rot (Pythium sp, Fusarium solani fsp. phaseoli, Rhizoctonia solani, Macrophomina phaseoli and Sclerotium rolfsii) and angular leaf spot (Phaeoisariopsis griseola) are currently regarded the most important bean diseases in Uganda and Rwanda [4]. The plant diseases lead to food deficit and food insecurity. In order to reduce the yield losses due to disease, it is important to define the diseases contributing to reduced yield, accurately estimate the severity of disease and propose the possible solutions. Therefore, this study was carried out to determine the levels of resistance to these two diseases in common bean genotypes bred for high Fe and Zn contents.

Materials and Methods

Research sites and plant materials

This study was carried out in the CIAT Africa screen house based at Kawanda Agricultural Research Laboratories Institute (KARL), Uganda. It was carried out from June to October 2012. 57 bean genotypes were used in the study. These genotypes were regional nutrition nursery breeding lines; advanced G × E stable lines; susceptible checks for root rot and ALS; low Fe check (CAL 96); and resistance checks for root rot (MLB49-89A/ RWR719) and ALS (MEX54/ BAT332) (Table 1).

No. Genotypes Origin   No. Genotypes Origin
1 NGWIN× CAB2/2/3/1/1 Rwanda   30 NUA 69 CIAT
2 NGWIN×CAB2 ×(RWV3317) Rwanda   31 KAB06F2.8-12 CIAT
3 MAC 42 Rwanda   32 RWR 2154 Rwanda
4 RWV 3316 Rwanda   33 RWR 2245 Rwanda
5 NUV 219-1 CIAT   34 KAB06F2.8-36 CIAT
6 CAB 2 Rwanda   35 KAB06F8.8-35 CIAT
7 RWV 2359 Rwanda   36 CODMLB 001 CIAT
8 Garukurare Rwanda   37 HM 21-7 CIAT
9 Kivuzo Rwanda   38 Ngwaku-Ngwaku. RDC
10 RWV1129 Rwanda   39 NUA 45 CIAT
11 Ndimirakagujavolubile Rwanda   40 NUA 59 CIAT
12 Icyana 2 Rwanda   41 NUA 56 CIAT
13 RWV 2361 Rwanda   42 NUA 35 CIAT
14 MAC 44 Rwanda   43 Gitanga Rwanda
15 RWV 3006 Rwanda   44 Zebra CIAT
16 RWV 2887 Rwanda   45 ACC 714 CIAT
17 MAC 74 Rwanda   46 CODMLB 033 CIAT
18 Agronome 2 Rwanda   47 ROBA 1 CIAT
19 VRA 4 CIAT   48 SMC 21 CIAT
20 Rugandura Rwanda   49 SEMC 16 CIAT
21 RWV 2070 Rwanda   50 SMC 18 CIAT
22 Kiangara DRC   51 SEMC 17 CIAT
23 VCB 81013 CIAT   52 GLP 2 CIAT
24 Gasirida Rwanda   53 CAL 96 (check: low Fe,  root rot susceptible) Uganda
25 MEX54/ BAT332 resistant check CIAT   54 DOR 500 (low Fe check Uganda
26 MIB 456-High Fe Universal Check CIAT   55 Maharagi Soya Rwanda
27 Decelaya 1-Low Fe Check Rwanda   56 MBC32 CIAT
28 KAB06F2.8-27 CIAT   57 Nyiramogorori2 Rwanda
29 NUA 99 CIAT        

Table 1: Plant materials used in the study of characterization of resistance of selected high iron beans to root rot and Angular Leaf Spot diseases.

Preparation of pathogen inocula, application and disease evaluation

Fusarium solani fsp. phaseoli: Inoculum for Fusarium solani fsp. phaseoli was prepared from isolate FSP-3, the most virulent isolate for Fusarium root rot obtained from infected bean fields in the Fusarium root rot hot spot in south-western Uganda [5]. Fusarium inoculum was isolated and prepared following CIAT’s laboratory training manual. The inoculum was reactivated by sub culturing it on a fresh PDA culture media. Sorghum grains were used as a medium for fungal inoculum multiplication. Approximately 400 ml of water to every 300 g of sorghum grains were placed in polyethylene bags, sterilized and allowed to cool for 12 h. A disc of agar bearing Fusarium spp. culture was incubated in the polyethylene bags over the sterilized sorghum grains in a sterile environment at a room temperature for 14 days to allow uniform growth. After incubation, Fusarium inoculum was mixed with the loam sandy soil previously sterilized by steaming on firewood for four hours and left overnight to cool. Sterile soil and inoculum were mixed in a ratio of 1:8 and put in a wooden flat tray and left to stabilize for seven days. In each tray, was planted 5 test varieties, each in 2 rows. A susceptible check (Cal 96) and a resistant check (MLB49-89A) were includes in each tray. Disease assessment was done twenty one days after planting by carefully uprooting all the seedlings planted per variety taking care not to damage roots and hypocotyls, and washing with clean tap water. For each variety, twenty plants were evaluated per replicate. FRR severity was assessed by scoring disease on roots and hypocotyls and scoring based on a 1 to 9 disease score [6]. Acccording to this scale, 1=no visible symptoms, 3=light discoloration either without necrotic lesions or with approximately 10% of the hypocotyls and root tissues covered with lesions; 5=approximately 25% of hypocotyls and root tissues covered with lesions but tissues remain firm with deterioration of the root system; 7=approximately 50% of hypocotyls and root tissues covered with lesions combined with considerable softening, rotting and reduction of root system, 9=approximately 75% or more of the hypocotyls and root tissues affected with advanced stages of rotting combined with severe reduction in the root system. The experiment was conducted in RCBD design with 3 replications. Data were subjected to ANOVA using Genstat [7].

Pythium sp: Inoculum for Pythium was prepared from P. ultimum isolate MS 61 from long term storage at CIAT, Kawanda. The inoculum was reactivated by sub-culturing it on a fresh PDA culture media. Finger millet grains were used as a medium for fungal growth. Approximately 200 ml of water to every 300 g of millet grains were placed in polyethylene bags, double sterilized and allowed to cool for 12 h. A disc of agar bearing Pythium spp culture was incubated in the polyethylene bags over the sterilized finger millet grains in a sterile environment at a room temperature for 14 days to allow uniform growth.

After incubation, Pythium inoculum was mixed with the loam sandy soil previously sterilized earlier as for Fusarium. Inoculum and soil were mixed in a 1:8 ratio, put in wooden flat trays and left to stabilize for seven days. Test varieties were planted in these trays as done for Fusarium solani above. Again, CAL 96 and RWR719 were included as susceptible and resistant checks respectively. Three weeks after planting, plants were uprooted, washed carefully and immediately evaluated for damage. Disease severity was scored using the 1 to 9 CIAT scale. Twenty plants per replication were evaluated. The experiment was laid out as a RCBD with 3 replications. Data were subjected to ANOVA using Genstat 14th edition.

Phaeoisariopsis griseola: For this pathogen, isolates KAK3, a virulent Andean isolate and isolate 2A a virulent Meso-American isolate were used for testing the 57 genotypes. Isolates were prepared for inoculation following the CIAT laboratory training manual procedures.

Forest black soil, lake sandy and decomposed farm yard manure were mixed in a ratio of 3:1:1 (currently used by CIAT) and was used in the screening. Test beans were planted in 5 L buckets and arranged in a RCBD with 3 replicates. Twenty-one (21) days after planting, bean leaves were inoculated using a hand sprayer, by misting inoculum onto lower surfaces of leaves when beans had developed two trifoliate leaves. Plants were thereafter covered with polyethylene bags maintained that way for three days.

On the appearance of ALS symptoms, the disease severity was assessed every three days for seven times. Four to five plants were evaluated per variety per replication. For the Andean isolate, genotypes CAL96 and MEX54 were included in the trial as susceptible and resistant checks respectively. MCM5001 and BAT332 were used as susceptible and resistant checks respectively for Meso-American isolate. The disease was rated according to the CIAT 1 to 9 scales CIAT [8] and the data were subjected to ANOVA using Genstat 14th edition.

Data analysis

Area under Disease Progress Curve (AUDPC) based on mean, was calculated for ALS while the mean mode, median and disease index [9] were used for Pythium and Fusarium root rot.

The AUDPC value for each genotype was calculated by trapezoidal integration [10] and is given by: AUDPC=Σ ((Xi+Xi+1)/2(ti+1-ti)) in which: Xi and Xi+1 is the disease severity for two consecutive assessments, and ti+1-ti the interval between two consecutive assessments [11]. The disease index for each variety was calculated according to Kobriger et al. [9] as: Disease Index=(Σ(disease class × number of plants in class)/ ((total plants) × 9) × 100) Statistical Analysis was performed by the ANOVA statistical procedure of Genstat GenStat 14th Edition.

Results

Augural leaf spot (ALS)

Tested varieties had a significant differences on resistance to ALS for both Andean and Mesoamerican isolates (P<0.001) (Table 2).

  Andean Isolate MesoAmerican Isolate
Source DF MS DF MS
Rep 2 707.77 2   701.30
Genotype 51 784.48*** 55 1227.20 ***
Residual 95   70.05 101   364.20
Total 148 324.86 158   668.80
CV     13.49      29.07
Mean     62.02      65.64
LSD     13.57      30.91

Table 2: ALS Anden and MesoAmerican isolates mean squares.

However, genotypes with the same letter were not significantly different (Table 3). Fourteen genotype including MAC 42, NUV 219-1, MAC 44, VRA 4, RWV 2070, KAB06F2.8-27, NUA 99, NUA 69, KAB06F2.8-12, RWR 2245, NUA 59, ACC 714, CODMLB 033, MBC32, and resistant checks (Mex54/BAT332) were identified as resistant to both Andean and Meso-American bean angular leaf spot isolates.

Genotypes AUDPC for Andean isolate  Group AUDPC for Meso-American isolate  Group
Ngwin× CAB2/2/3/1/1 75.0 mno 63.2 Bcdefghijklmno
Ngwin× CAB2(RWV3317) 75.2 mno 81.6 Jklmnopqrst
MAC 42 29.0 ab 40.4 Abcd
RWV 3316 75.6  no 93.2 Opqrst
NUV 219-1 51.7 efgh 51.3 Abcdefghij
CAB 2 - - 39.5 Abc
RWV 2359 76.6  o 51.4 Abcdefghij
Garukurare 75.4 mno 64.6 Bcdefghijklmno
Kivuzo 73.7 lmno 103.5 Rst
RWV1129 75.4 mno 53.5 Abcdefghij
Ndimirakagujavol 75.6  no 78.4 Hijklmnopqrst
Icyana 2 73.0 klmno 87.8 Mnopqrst
RWV 2361 73.0 klmno 74.4 Fghijklmnopqr
MAC 44 60.5 fghijkl 54.0 Abcdefghijk
RWV 3006 64.6 hijklmno 44.8 Abcdefg
RWV 2887 76.0  o 91.6 Nopqrst
MAC 74 65.5 ijklmno 50.6 Abcdefghi
Agronome 2 72.7 klmno 87.0 Mnopqrst
VRA 4 35.2 abcd 42.9 Abcde
Rugandura 60.5 fghijkl 85.5 Lmnopqrst
RWV 2070 23.5  a 35.5 Ab
Kiangara 72.1 klmno 55.5 Abcdefghijkl
VCB 81013 75.0 mno 62.2 Bcdefghijklmn
Gasirida 76.2  o 95.6 Pqrst
MEX54/BAT332 resistant checks 31.3 ab 26.8  A
MIB 456-High Fe Universal Check 76.8  o 98.6 Qrst
Decelaya 1-Low Fe Check - - 50.0 Abcdefghi
KAB06F2.8-27 30.5 ab 59.2 Bcdefghijklm
NUA 99 48.4 def 44.0 Abcdef
NUA 69 34.5 abc 45.3 Abcdefg
KAB06F2.8-12 32.5 ab 49.0 Abcdefgh
RWR 2154 73.0 klmno 106.7  T
RWR 2245 56.1 fghij 53.7 Abcdefghij
KAB06F2.8-36 55.4 fghi 105.7  St
KAB06F8.8-35 51.0 efg 78.4 Hijklmnopqrst
CODMLB 001 74.2 mno 72.3 Efghijklmnopq
HM 21-7 71.0 klmno 52.5 Abcdefghij
Ngwaku-Ngwaku 73.6 lmno 54.2 Abcdefghijk
NUA 45 - - - -
NUA 59 41.0 bcde 52.0 Abcdefghij
NUA 56 59.6 fghijk 70.9 Defghijklmnopq
NUA 35 67.5 ijklmno 62.8 Bcdefghijklmno
Gitanga 69.4 jklmno 67.8 Cdefghijklmnopq
Zebra 74.2 mno 106.9  T
ACC 714 31.5 ab 49.4 Abcdefgh
CODMLB 033 35.1 abcd 43.7 Abcdef
Roba 1 75.2 mno 41.0 Abcd
SMC 21 76.2  o 65.9 Bcdefghijklmnop
SEMC 16 - - 55.7 Abcdefghijkl
SMC 18 75.5 mno 73.2 Efghijklmnopqr
SEMC 17 62.2 ghijklmn 75.0 Ghijklmnopqrs
GLP 2 - - 85.0 Klmnopqrst
CAL 96-Low Fe check susceptible check 75.1 mno 90.7 Nopqrst
DOR 500-Low Universal check 74.2 mno 70.7 Defghijklmnopq
Maharagi soya 66.9 ijklmno 50.2 Abcdefghi
MBC32 47.2 cdef 48.9 Abcdefgh
Nyiramogorori2 75.0 mno 80.9 Ijklmnopqrst
LSD   13.6      30.9  

Table 3: AUDPCvalues for Andean and MesoAmerican isolates on tested genotypes.

Root rot

A high and significant (P<0.001) difference in resistance to Fusarium root rot and Pythium root rot isolates was observed among the tested genotype (Table 4). However, the means, modes and medians for both Fusarium and Pythium root rot isolates were not significantly different (Table 5). Seven genotype; Rugandura, Kiangara, Decelaya 1, Gitanga, Zebra, ACC 714, Nyiramogorori2 were identified as resistant varieties to both Fusarium root rot and Pythium root rot.

    Fusarium root rot isolate Pythium root rot isolate
    Mean Median Mode   Mean Mode Median
Source of variation DF MS MS MS DF MS MS MS
Reps 2 10.247 ** 25.158 ** 50.518  ** 2 28.08 *** 36.21 *** 38.838 ***
Genotype 54 8.485*** 15.768 *** 17.717 *** 54 13.48*** 24.01*** 22.62 ***
Residual 106 2.043 5.626 7.533 101 1.731 5.015 4.49
Total 162 4.291 9.248 11.458 157 6.107 11.946 11.163
                 
CV   31.458 55.560 57.988   24.607 41.28 40.53
Mean   4.544 4.269 4.733   5.347 5.42 5.23
LSD   2.314 3.840 4.443   2.131 3.63 3.43

Table 4: Means squares for both beansFusarium and Pythium root rot.

Genotype Fusarium root rot Pythium root rot
Mean Median Mode DI Mean Median Mode DI
Ngwin x CAB2/2/3/1/1 5.54 6.66 6.66 65 6.72 8.99 8.99 76
Ngwin×CAB2×(RWV3317) 6.73 6.99 6.66 73 8.44 8.99 8.99 94
MAC 42 3.79 2.16 1.99 42 6.02 6.66 6.66 66
RWV 3316 4.22 2.49 4.33 47 2.83 1.99 1.99 30
NUV 219-1 4.91 4.33 4.33 54 5.06 2.32 4.32 57
CAB 2 6.05 4.83 6.66 59 4.99 5.92 5.91 69
RWV 2359 7.91 9.19 8.98 88 8.07 8.99 8.99 89
Garukurare 3.93 3.66 4.66 43 2.64 1.99 1.99 29
Kivuzo 5.71 6.66 6.66 62 3.74 2.16 1.99 42
RWV1129 8.51 8.99 8.99 96 8.99 8.99 8.99 100
Ndimirakagujavol 3.66 2.33 1.99 40 3.06 2.32 1.99 34
Icyana 2 3.48 2.33 4.33 39 2.46 1.99 1.99 28
RWV 2361 4.72 4.33 4.33 51 3.25 2.16 2.32 36
MAC 44 5.47 6.99 6.66 62 6.56 6.99 8.99 75
RWV 3006 3.87 2.66 4.66 40 4.69 4.66 4.32 44
RWV 2887 4.99 4.66 6.66 56 7.14 8.99 8.99 79
MAC 74 4.12 2.33 4.33 47 7.14 8.99 8.99 81
Agronome 2 5.66 5.71 5.99 48 9.14 9.07 9.09 100
VRA 4 4.80 4.49 4.33 55 6.13 5.16 4.99 71
Rugandura 2.00 1.99 1.99 22 2.02 1.99 1.99 22
RWV 2070 7.61 8.99 8.99 84 5.92 5.66 6.66 64
Kiangara 2.03 1.99 1.99 23 2.83 1.99 1.99 31
VCB 81013 3.63 4.33 4.33 41 2.36 1.99 1.99 27
Gasirida 2.99 1.99 1.99 33 5.85 4.99 4.66 63
MLB49-89A/ RWR719 Resistant check 2.13 1.99 1.99 24 2.01 1.99 1.99 22
MIB 456-High Fe Universal Check 2.39 1.99 1.99 27 3.48 2.32 2.32 38
Decelaya 1-Low Fe Check 3.03 1.99 1.99 37 2.58 2.77 2.73 22
KAB06F2.8-27 5.58 4.83 6.66 64 5.19 6.66 6.66 56
NUA 99 6.05 6.99 8.99 67 7.06 6.99 6.66 79
NUA 69 5.56 4.66 6.66 62 7.10 8.99 8.99 78
KAB06F2.8-12 4.52 3.83 2.33 50 6.84 6.99 6.66 73
RWR 2154 4.95 4.66 6.66 58 7.65 8.99 8.99 85
RWR 2245 5.84 4.33 4.33 68 3.57 1.99 1.99 40
KAB06F2.8-36 5.23 4.66 6.66 59 8.91 8.99 8.99 98
KAB06F8.8-35 4.73 3.33 4.33 50 6.17 4.66 4.32 71
CODMLB 001 3.51 2.66 2.33 39 7.42 8.99 8.99 81
HM 21-7 3.49 4.33 4.33 48 4.20 2.32 2.32 47
Ngwaku-Ngwaku 3.11 2.33 2.33 32 4.74 5.92 5.91 58
NUA 45                
NUA 59 6.91 6.99 8.99 70 7.39 6.99 8.99 81
NUA 56 7.96 8.99 8.99 89 8.56 8.99 8.99 95
NUA 35 6.86 8.99 8.99 76 8.48 8.60 8.62 98
Gitanga 2.00 1.99 1.99 22 1.99 1.99 1.99 22
Zebra 2.65 1.99 1.99 28 3.21 1.99 1.99 36
ACC 714 2.00 1.99 1.99 22 2.18 1.99 1.99 24
CODMLB 033 3.89 2.33 4.33 43 5.87 4.32 4.32 62
Roba 1 2.33 2.33 2.33 26 3.26 2.32 4.32 37
SMC 21 3.66 1.99 1.99 41 6.40 6.99 6.99 67
SEMC 16 4.76 4.49 4.33 52 5.24 5.82 6.99 63
SMC 18 3.68 2.33 1.99 41 5.58 4.32 4.32 53
SEMC 17 4.96 4.66 4.33 55 6.81 6.99 6.99 75
GLP 2                
CAL 96-Low Fe check susceptible check 7.56 8.99 8.99 86 8.61 8.99 8.99 96
DOR 500-Low Universal check 3.22 2.33 4.33 36 5.57 4.32 4.32 63
Maharagi soya 3.54 1.99 1.99 40 3.36 2.32 2.32 37
MBC32 5.45 6.66 6.66 61 6.60 6.16 8.99 73
Nyiramogorori2 2.03 1.99 1.99 23 2.01 1.99 1.99 22

Table 5: Means, modes and medians values for both beans Fusarium and Pythium root rot.

Discussion

In this study, genotypes that make up the regional nutritional nursery were screened to identify new and better sources of resistance to both bean angular leaf spot and root rot diseases. Genotypes exhibited different reactions to the different diseases. Only ACC 714 exhibited resistance to both Andean and MesoAmerican isolates of bean angular leaf spot and also to Fusarium and Pythium root rot. This genotype is highly recommended for both nutritional and multi-resistance breeding program. The results also indicate that resistance to different pathogens can be pyramided into appropriate background to provide broad spectrum resistance in iron and zinc biofortified bean genotypes.

The results of this study showed that some of the nutritional bean genotypes have good levels of resistance to a particular pathogen. In 2007, Wagara and Kimani [12] reported that some on the nutrient rich bean varieties evaluated in Kenya possessed good level of resistance to major diseases occurring in farmer fields. For example, they reported that Kiangara had high to moderate resistance to major biotic constraints in Kenya. In the current study, Kiangara exhibited an intermediate level of resistance to both ALS and root rot. Results suggest that selecting biofortified beans for broad resistance to diseases in plant breeding programs is possible; and that this can result in significant amounts of genetic resources for multiple purposes with minimal resources. Thus, our results support the fact that breeding for higher iron as well as high zinc content and multiple resistance in common beans could contribute significantly to improving the life status of individuals dependent on beans as staple foods [13].

Conclusion and Recommendations

The study revealed variations among the screened nutritional bean varieties according to resistance to different pathogens. This implied the potential for utilization of some of these varieties to pyramid useful disease resistance and high Fe and Zn content quantitative trait loci into appropriate background to provide durable resistance in bean genotypes higher in iron and zinc content. The variety ACC 714 was attributed to a broad resistance among 57 genotypes screened for bean angular leaf spot (Psuedocercospora griseola) and bean root rot (Pythium ultimum and Fusarium solani fsp. phaseoli) under inoculation in the screenhouse. Efforts should be made to promote selection of genotypes that combine high capacity to accumulate high iron and zinc content in their seed and high level of resistance to major stresses.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Rwanda Agriculture Board, Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa, Makerere University, CIAT Africa, Harvest Plus project for the support to this work.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Recommended Conferences

Article Usage

  • Total views: 205
  • [From(publication date):
    April-2017 - May 29, 2017]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 175
  • PDF downloads :30
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version