Performance Evaluation of Small white common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Varieties at Buno Bedele and Ilu Aba Bora Zones, South-western Oromia

  

    
 
      
Varieties 
    
Buno Bedele
    
Ilu Aba Bora
    
 
      
Overall Means 
    
 
      
YA (%) 
  
  

    
Bedele
    
Dabo Hana 
    
Bure
  
  

    

      
Mex-142 
    
    
2031.66ab
    
1765.51bcd
    
1053.06bc
    
1616.74bc
    
-2.81
  
  

    

      
RAZ-42 
    
    
1840.51bc
    
1645.91cd
    
1391.39ab
    
1626.58bc
    
-2.22
  
  

    

      
Awash-1 
    
    
1413.54cd
    
1289.99d
    
663.89c
    
1261.36c
    
-24.17
  
  

    

      
Awash melka 
    
    
1211.88d
    
1226.13d
    
985.28bc
    
1307.76c
    
-21.38
  
  

    

      
Awash mitin 
    
    
2559.10a
    
2886.61a
    
1712.50a
    
2330.51a
    
40.10
  
  

    

      
Wabero 
    
    
2010.75ab
    
1883.85bc
    
1393.33ab
    
1878.11b
    
12.90
  
  

    

      
Local 
    
    
1619.13bcd
    
2222.36b
    
1148.89abc
    
1663.46bc
    
0
  
  

    
Mean
    
1812.37
    
1845.77
    
1192.62
    
1668.50
    
 
  
  

    
LSD (0.05)
    
567.65
    
548.08
    
623.47
    
415.19
    
 
  
  

    
CV (%)
    
26.66
    
27.27
    
29.50
    
31.65
    
 
  
  

    
P-value
    
*** 
    
** 
    
* 
    
*** 
    
 
  
  

    
 
    
 
    
Note: LSD=least significant    difference, CV= coefficient of variation, NS=non-significant, *, ** and    ***, significance at 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001 probability levels respectively and    YA=yield advantage.
    
 
    
 
    
 
  

Table 4: Combined mean grain yield (kg ha-1) of seven (7) small Common bean
varieties tested at Bedele, Dabo Hana and Bure districts for two years (2023-
2024).

The high yielder variety at most locations was found with Awash mitin variety which indicates the presence of genetic potential for resistance of varies stress conditions for creating this stability of yield potential across locations. Generally, the varieties respond differently to diverse environments leading to the essence of identification of a potential variety for specific location. Similarly, the existence of wide genetic variation in grain yield and yield components of common bean has been reported by various authors [17,18].

Performances of Agronomic Phenology, Growth and Yield Related Traits

The combined analysis of variance over the two seasons revealed a highly significant (P < 0.01) difference in flowering days, maturity days, height of the plant, number of pod per plant and number of seed per pod between the studied varieties (Table 4). This finding suggests that genotypic variability exists among the small white common bean varieties studied and the traits under consideration.

Days to Flowering (DF)

Days to flowering and maturity are among the most vital characteristics that need to be considered in selecting varieties when and where the lack of rainfall is limiting factor for further enhancement of yield and yield related traits. The earliness trait (days to flowering and days to physiological maturity) enables crops to flower and mature early, escaping from moisture stress that results in reduced yield. According to this study, the mean of days to flowering over location was ranged from 35.00 to 45.33 from Awash-1 and Local check respectively.

Days to Maturity (DM)

There was significant variation (P < 0.01) in yield components among the small white common bean varieties in the combined analysis over location (Table 4) at all sites. The interaction of variety with location also significantly affected days to physiological maturity and grain yield in the combined analysis. Among the tested varieties the Wabero and Awash mitin were early matured with respective values of 71.20 and 72.40 days. On the other hand, Local check and RAZ-42 had longest time of maturity with respective values of 89.20 and 82.27 days (Table 4). This indicated that, the advantage of those varieties for escaping moisture stress condition of study area. Tigist et al. [7] studied on 144 genotypes of common bean at three locations of Oromia region and indicated that days to maturity showed a significant difference between varieties, locations and GXE interactions.

Number of Pods per Plant (NPP)

The interaction of small white common bean varieties with different locations revealed a highly significant (p<0.01) difference on number of pods per plant (Table 4). The higher number of pods per plant was recorded from Awash mitin (24.19) followed by Wabero (18.03) as compared to other testing varieties, whereas the lowest was obtained from Awash-1 variety (13.17) However, it is difficult to conclude increment number of pod per plant can be increase yield per hectare; because total yield also influenced by the yield harvested from individual plant and number of plants per hectare. Etana and Nebiyu [2] reported that number of pods per plant showed significant difference between four studied common bean varieties, of which, two from farmers cultivars and two from improved varieties

Number of Seeds per Pod (NSP)

The varieties and locations alone revealed a highly significant difference on number of seeds per pod (Table 4). Maximum number of seeds per pod was recorded from Awash mitin (7.18) variety followed by Wabero (6.68) variety. Whereas, the lowest number of seeds per pod (4.18) was obtained with local check. This variation could be due to genetic inherent of those improved small white common bean varieties produced more number of seeds per pod. Etana and Nebiyu [2] also reported that number seeds per pod showed a highly significant difference between the varieties in common bean.

Plant Height (PH)

There was significant difference among the verities for plant height. Maximum plant height was noted in variety RAZ-42 (75.40cm) followed by Mex-142 (74.65cm), whereas; the lowest plant height was recorded in local variety (64.61 cm).

Reaction to Major Diseases

The major common bean diseases according to their importance in the growing areas are rust, anthracnose and bacterial blight rust are the most important ones among the various diseases that affect the crop. In 1-9 rating scale, Awash mitin, Wabero and RAZ-42 scored 3 (moderately resistant) for all the above mentioned diseases. The varieties are characterized by moderately resistance types of reaction to these major diseases at all the sites (Table 5).

Table 5: Combined ANOVA of yield related traits for seven small Common bean Varieties.

  

    

      
Varieties 
    
    

      
DF (days) 
    
    

      
DM (days) 
    
    

      
PH (cm) 
    
    

      
NPP 
    
    

      
NSP 
    
    

      
Dis.(AB) 
    
  
  

    

      
Mex-142 
    
    

      
39.80bcd
    
    

      
76.87bc
    
    

      
74.65a
    
    

      
14.70bc
    
    

      
5.98bc
    
    

      
40ms 
    
  
  

    

      
RAZ-42 
    
    

      
43.40ab
    
    

      
82.27ab 
    
    

      
75.40a
    
    

      
16.63bc
    
    

      
6.48abc
    
    

      
20mr 
    
  
  

    

      
Awash-1 
    
    

      
35.00d
    
    

      
76.87bc
    
    

      
62.08b
    
    

      
13.17c
    
    

      
5.79c
    
    

      
40ms 
    
  
  

    

      
Awash melka 
    
    

      
42.60abc
    
    

      
75.67bc
    
    

      
65.76ab
    
    

      
15.02bc
    
    

      
5.80c
    
    

      
40ms 
    
  
  

    

      
Awash mitin 
    
    

      
41.60abc
    
    

      
72.40c
    
    

      
65.44ab
    
    

      
24.19a
    
    

      
7.18a
    
    

      
20mr 
    
  
  

    

      
Wabero 
    
    

      
37.47cd
    
    

      
71.20c
    
    

      
62.17b
    
    

      
18.03b
    
    

      
6.68ab
    
    

      
20mr 
    
  
  

    

      
Local 
    
    

      
45.33a
    
    

      
89.20a 
    
    

      
67.15ab
    
    

      
14.83bc
    
    

      
4.18d
    
    

      
40ms 
    
  
  

    

      
Mean 
    
    

      
40.74
    
    

      
77.78
    
    

      
67.52
    
    

      
16.65
    
    

      
6.01
    
    

      
 
    
  
  

    

      
LSD (0.05) 
    
    

      
5.44
    
    

      
7.17
    
    

      
11.41
    
    

      
4.43
    
    

      
0.85
    
    

      
 
    
  
  

    

      
CV (%) 
    
    

      
18.43
    
    

      
12.72
    
    

      
23.32
    
    

      
26.72
    
    

      
19.50
    
    

      
 
    
  
  

    

      
P-value 
    
    

      
**
    
    

      
***
    
    

      
**
    
    

      
**
    
    

      
***
    
    

      
 
    
  
  

    

      
Note: DF= days to    flowering, DM= days to maturity, PH= plant height, NPP= Number of pod per    plant, NSP= Number of seed per pod, AB=Aschochyta Blight, LSD=least    significant difference, CV= coefficient of variation, NS=non-significant, ** &    ***, significance at 0.01 and 0.001 respectively.
    
  

Table 5: Combined ANOVA of yield related traits for seven small Common bean
Varieties.

Close

Additive Main Effects and Multiple Interaction (AMMI) model

The AMMI analysis of variance of seven (7) small white common bean tested over six environments revealed that 14.92% of the total sum of squares (SS) was contributed to environments (E), 25.76% to the genotypes (G) and 23.08% to GEI effects (Table 6). A large SS for environments indicated that the genotypes were diverse with large differences among the means. The magnitude of G x E SS was close to that for the SS for G, thus indicating that the differences in the response of the genotypes across environments were noteworthy.

Table 6: AMMI analysis for grain yield of seven (7) small white common bean varieties.

  

    
SOV
    
Df
    
SS
    
MS
    
Variance (%)
    
Cumulative (%)
  
  

    
REP (ENV)
    
12
    
1809405.1
    
150783.76ns
    
 
    
 
  
  

    
ENV
    
5
    
26899201.2
    
5379840.24**
    
14.92
    
 
  
  

    
GEN
    
6
    
46435309.5
    
7739218.25**
    
25.76
    
 
  
  

    
GEN: ENV
    
30
    
41599860.1
    
1386662.00**
    
23.08
    
 
  
  

    
PCA-1
    
10
    
30699606.7
    
3069960.67**
    
73.80
    
73.80
  
  

    
PCA-2
    
8
    
6245486.0
    
780685.75*
    
15.01
    
88.81
  
  

    
Residuals
    
72
    
21917118.0
    
304404.42
    
 
    
 
  
  

    
Total
    
155
    
180260754.2
    
1162972.61
    
 
    
 
  
  

    
 
    
 
    
 
    
Note: *** Significant difference at (P=0.001), SOV=source of    variation, Df=degree of freedom, SS=sum of square, MS=mean sum of square,    PCA= principal component of axis.
    
 
    
 
  

Table 6: AMMI analysis for grain yield of seven (7) small white common bean
varieties.

Close

The first principal component axis (PCA-1) accounted for 73.80 % of the interaction SS in 19.35% of the interaction degrees of freedom and PCA-2 explained further 15.01% of the interaction SS (Table 5). The mean square (MS) for both IPCA-1 and IPCA-2 were significant at P<0.01 and p<0.05 levels respectively and cumulatively paid to 88.81% of the total interaction.

GGE Bi-plot Analysis

GGE bi-plot is important to visualize the genotype by environment interaction. The GGE bi plot graphic analyses of the seven small white common bean varieties tested across six environments are presented in the figures below.

Ranking Genotypes

Stability can be identified using concentric circles and also ideal genotypes are at the center of the concentric circle. The ideal genotype is the one that with the highest mean performance and absolutely stable [12]. The genotypes that are closer to the ideal genotypes are the best performing genotypes. Hence, the GGE bi plots shows that Awash mitin is an ideal variety, with other varieties like Wabero and Local are desirable varieties as they are closer to the ideal variety on the bi plot. The varieties Awash-1 and Awash-melka are the most undesirable varieties as they are too far to the ideal variety on the bi plot.

Ranking of Environment

The most representative of the environments (ability to represent the mega environment) and the most powerful to discriminate varieties reported that the ideal environment is the one located at the center of the concentric circles, and it is possible to identify desirable environments based on their closeness to the ideal environment. Therefore, Among the test locations, location E1 which fell into the center of concentric circles was an ideal test location in terms of being the most representative of the overall environments and the most powerful to discriminate the performance of the tested genotypes.

Next to the first concentric circle location, environments E3, E4 and E2 are close to the best environment while, environments E5 and E6 are noticed as the weakest locations to classify varieties (Figure 2).

Figure 1: Ranking of the seven varieties tested across environments.

    

    

    Figure 1: Ranking of the seven varieties tested across environments.
    

Close

Figure 2: Ranking of six environments.

    

    

    Figure 2: Ranking of six environments.
    

Close

Which-Won-Where Pattern

The polygon view of GGE bi-plot indicates the best genotypes in each environment and group of environments [14]. The polygon is formed by joining the genotypes that are farthest away from the bi-plot origin, such that all the other genotypes are contained in the polygon. In this case, the polygon connects all the farthest genotypes and perpendicular lines divide the polygon into sectors. Sectors help to visualize the mega-environments. This means that winning genotypes for each sector are placed at the vertex. Polygon view of the small white common bean varieties tested at six environments locations presented in (Figure 3). Hence, Awash-1, Awash melka, RAZ-42, Mex-142, Awash mitin and local varieties were the vertex small white common varieties. From this figure, Wabero, Awashmitin and Local varieties well performed at E4, E3, E2 and E1 in the first mega environment. In the second mega environment Mex-142 variety was good performed at E5 and E6. From the figure, Awash-1, Awash melka and RAZ-42 had no environment on the vertex. This indicates that varieties in the vertex without environment performed poorly in all the locations.

Figure 3: Polygon views of the GGE-bi-plot for which-won where and mega- environment.

    

    

    Figure 3: Polygon views of the GGE-bi-plot for which-won where and
mega- environment.
    

Close

Conclusion and Recommendation

Common bean is one of Africa's most vital pulses. The adaptation of common bean varieties to drought-stress situations is very crucial for drought vulnerable areas particularly lowland parts of Ethiopia. The crop provides vital nutrients as a food including vitamins, proteins, minerals and the stems are also used as fodder for livestock, especially in the dry spell following the main cropping season. As a legume, common bean plants also contribute to soil fertility enhancement through atmospheric nitrogen fixation.

The present study shown the presence of genetic variability among varieties with respect to different traits. The presence of significant difference among common bean varieties for the studied traits ensured the presence of large genetic variation to be improved through selection. Plant breeding is primarily depending on presence of substantial genetic variation to address the maximum genetic yield potential of the crops and exploitation of these variations through effective selection for further improvement.

Analysis of variance showed highly significant varietal differences days to flowering, plant height and number of pod per plant at 1% probability level and very highly significant difference observed for days to maturity, number of seed per pod and grain yield 0.1% probability level. The combined means result indicated that the Awash mitin (2330.51kgha-1) and Wabero (1878.11kgha-1) small white common bean varieties had the highest yield respectively. Thus, Awash mitin and Wabero were identified as the best varieties in terms of yield, stability, tolerant to diseases and better agronomic performance. Hence, as compared to the others, those two small white common bean varieties were recommended as promising varieties to the farmers of study areas with similar agro-ecologies based on their optimal yield performance for further adoption.

Acknowledgments

The authors warm gratitude and acknowledge goes to Oromia Agricultural Research Institute and Bedele Agricultural Research Center for providing research budget and facilitate the process. We would like also to express sincere thanks to Melkasa and Sinana Agricultural Research Centers for providing experimental materials and also crop research processes members for contributing their great effort in the fruitful achievement of the trial.

References

1. Pandey M and Kumar N. Diversity of traditional grain legumes of himalayan region of uttarakhand: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 2024; 45: 96-102.
2. Etana D and Nebiyu A. Response of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to lime and TSP fertilizer under acid soil. Heliyon. 2023; 9.
3. Huang Y, Liu X, Cao D, Chen G, Li S, Wang G, et al. Cross-species Amplification of Common Bean (Pha seolus vulgaris) EST-SSRs within Hyacinth Bean, Pea and Soybean. Legume Research. 2021; 44: 287-291.
4. Legesse DG, Kumssa T, Assefa M, Taha J, Gobena T, et al. Production and Marketing of White Pea Beans in the Rift Valley, Ethiopia. A Sub-Sector Analysis. National Bean Research Program of the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research. 2006.
5. Fikru M. Haricot Ban (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Variety Development in the lowland areas of Wollo. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Regional Conference on Completed Crops Research Activities. Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. 2007; 86-93.
6. Buruchara R, Rowland C, Sperling L, Claire M, Jean-Claude R, Mutonhi R, et al. Development and delivery of bean varieties in Africa: The Pan-Africa Bean Research Alliance (PABRA) model. African Crop Science Journal. 2011; 19: 227-245.
7. Tigist S, Julia S, Assefa A and Gemechu K. Agromorphological and physiological performance of Ethiopian common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under different agroecological conditions. Plants. 2023; 12: 23-42.
8. CSA. Report on Area and Production of Major Crops. In The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency (CSA). 2021; 1.
9. Central Statistical Agency (CSA). Agricultural Sample Survey Series: Report on Area and Production for Major Crops (Private Holdings, Main Season). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 2022.
10. Ali K, Ahmed S, Beniwal S, Kenneni G, Malhotra RS. Food and forage legumes in Ethiopia. Progress and prospects, Proceedings of the workshop on food and forage legumes 22-26 September 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 2006.
11. Ferris S and Kaganzi E. Evaluating marketing opportunities for haricot beans in Ethiopia. 2008.
12. Yan W, Kang MS. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, USA. 2003; 271.
13. Yan W, Hunt LA, Sheng Q, Szlavnics Z. Cultivar evaluation and megaenvironment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 2000; 40: 597–605.
14. Yan W, Rajcan I. Biplot analysis of test sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Crop Sci. 2002; 42: 11–20.
15. Perreira HS, Melo LS, Faria LC, Diaz JLC, Peloso DMJ, Costa JGC and Wendland A. Stablity and adaptablity of Carioca Common Bean Genotypes in States of Central South Region of Brazil. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology. 2009; 9: 181-188.
16. Perreira HS, Melo LC, Faria LC, Diaz JL, Peloso MJ and Wendland A. Environmental strastificatioin in Parana and Santa Catarina to Evaluate Common Bean Genotypes. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnolgy. 2010; 10: 132-139.
17. Loha Gobeze and Silas Merkineh and Gidago Gifole. Effect of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties and variable rates of potassium fertilizer on yield and yield-related traits at areka, Southern Ethiopia. Applied and Environmental Soil Science. 2023; 1-8.
18. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Faostat. 2023.

Download PDF

Citation:Mohammed Tesiso, Garoma Firdisa. Performance Evaluation of Small white common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Varieties at Buno Bedele and Ilu Aba Bora Zones, South-western Oromia. Ann Agric Crop Sci. 2025; 10(1): 1178.

Home

Journal Scope

editorial Board

Instruction for Authors

Submit Your Article

Contact Us