Fixed effect genetic analysis of a diallel cross in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

1986 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 449-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. N. Wassimi ◽  
T. G. Isleib ◽  
G. L. Hosfield
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Genetic Analysis ◽  
Diallel Cross ◽  
Fixed Effect ◽  
Dry Beans ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L

scholarly journals Genetic Analysis of Flooding Tolerance in an Andean Diversity Panel of Dry Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Soltani ◽  
Samira MafiMoghaddam ◽  
Atena Oladzad-Abbasabadi ◽  
Katelynn Walter ◽  
Patrick J. Kearns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Genetic Analysis ◽  
Flooding Tolerance ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L ◽  
Dry Bean ◽  
Diversity Panel

Use of Extrusion Technology To Overcome Undesirable Properties of Hard-To-Cook Dry Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

1995 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 2487-2492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline J. Steel ◽  
Valdemiro C. Sgarbieri ◽  
Marisa H. Jackix
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Dry Beans ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L ◽  
Extrusion Technology

scholarly journals Diversity and genetic analysis through DArTseq in common bean(Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm from Turkey

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 389-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seda NEMLİ ◽  
Tansel KAYGISIZ AŞÇIOĞUL ◽  
Duygu ATEŞ ◽  
Dursun EŞİYOK ◽  
Muhammed Bahattin TANYOLAÇ
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Genetic Analysis ◽  
Common Bean ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L

Simulation of the Responses of Dry Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to Irrigation

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 1983-1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mónica Espadafor ◽  
Lairson Couto ◽  
Morethson Resende ◽  
Delbert W. Henderson ◽  
Margarita García-Vila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Simulation Model ◽  
Soil Water ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Dry Beans ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Crop Simulation ◽  
Wide Range

Abstract. AquaCrop is a crop simulation model developed by the FAO aimed at assessing the yield response to water supply. Once the model is calibrated and validated, it is a useful tool to simulate crop yields under different management options or climatic and soil conditions. Until now, AquaCrop has not been parameterized for dry beans ( L.), and thus our objective was to calibrate and validate the model for this crop using experiments performed 40 years ago at Davis, California. A set of parameters derived from the calibration with one irrigation experiment was used to validate the model using five experiments carried out in 1977 and 1978 that had treatments vastly differing in irrigation depth and frequency. Yield predictions over a wide range of values (<1 to 3.5 t ha-1) were very good, with RMSE of 0.16 t ha-1 and Willmott’s d of 0.978. Seasonal ET was also accurately predicted by the model (RMSE = 40 mm, d = 0.930), as also evidenced by comparing the lysimeter measured ET of 489 mm against the lysimeter simulated ET of 501 mm. Canopy cover and the time course of biomass were adequately simulated as well. Even though total soil water extraction was well simulated, the simulated soil water distribution with depth differed from measured values in the dryland treatment. We conclude that AquaCrop can now be used for the simulation of dry beans in different environments, and we emphasize the value of carefully conducted field experiments for the validation of crop simulation models. Keywords: AquaCrop, Calibration and validation, Dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), Irrigation, Simulation model, Water stress.

Nutrient Composition, Protein Quality, and Sensory Properties of Thirty-Six Cultivars of Dry Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

1987 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 1335-1340 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. H. KOEHLER ◽  
CH'IUNG-HSIA CHANG ◽  
GENEVIEVE SCHEIER ◽  
D. W. BURKE
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Nutrient Composition ◽  
Sensory Properties ◽  
Dry Beans ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L

scholarly journals Impact of common bacterial blight on the yield, seed weight and seed discoloration of different market classes of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. G. Boersma ◽  
A. Hou ◽  
C. L. Gillard ◽  
K. B. McRae ◽  
R. L. Conner
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Seed Weight ◽  
Bacterial Blight ◽  
Common Bacterial Blight ◽  
Yield Losses ◽  
Dry Beans ◽  
Phaseolus Vulgaris L ◽  
Navy Bean ◽  
Navy Beans ◽  
The Impact

Boersma, J. G., Hou, A., Gillard, C. L., McRae, K. B. and Conner, R. L. 2015. Impact of common bacterial blight on the yield, seed weight and seed discoloration of different market classes of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 95: 703–710. Common bacterial blight (CBB) is a seed-borne disease of dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), causing significant economic loss to growers due to reductions in seed yield and quality and the need to annually purchase disease-free seed. Over the past decade a number of breeding lines and cultivars with resistance to CBB have been developed in several bean market classes including navy, black and cranberry beans. A comparison of three susceptible navy bean cultivars and seven resistant navy, three black and one cranberry bean entries in Manitoba revealed that most resistant navy and black bean lines had significantly reduced the incidence of leaf symptoms and their mean yield losses were reduced to less than 17%, while those of the susceptible lines were as high as 36% under severe disease pressure. Only the weakly resistant navy bean cultivar HR67 and the cranberry bean line F4GR1 failed to substantially reduce CBB symptoms or show a yield advantage. The Simple Sequence Repeat (SSR) marker PVctt001 in combination with Sequence Characterized Amplified Region (SCAR) marker SU91 was associated with a low incidence of CBB symptoms and a reduced yield loss in five navy bean lines, but not in the cranberry bean line F4GR1. Disease symptoms on the pods in the resistant black and navy beans and seed discoloration of navy beans caused by CBB were also significantly reduced by resistance. Seed weights were reduced by 2.1–4.7% in the susceptible cultivars, but there was only a slight or no decrease or no effect on the seed weight of the CBB-resistant lines and cultivars. Generally the magnitude of the reductions in yield was much greater than the impact on seed weight, which suggests that yield losses were caused by a combination of reduced seed weight and the number of seeds per plant.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document