Comparison of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes for nitrogen fixation tolerance to soil drying
- 960 Downloads
Common bean is a major source of protein for many people worldwide. However, the crop is often subjected to drought conditions and its advantage in undertaking symbiotic nitrogen fixation can be severely decreased. The primary objective of this study was to compare the resistance of nitrogen fixation of 12 selected genotypes to soil drying.
Twelve common bean genotypes of diverse genetic background were compared. Plants were grown in pots and subjected to soil drying over about 2 weeks. Nitrogen fixation was measured daily using a flow-through acetylene reduction technique. The plants were exposed to acetylene for only a short time period allowing repeated measures. The acetylene reduction rate of plants on drying soil was normalized against the rates measured for well-watered plants.
Substantial variability was identified among genotypes in the threshold soil water content at which nitrogen fixation was observed to decrease. Genotypes SER 16, SXB 412, NCB 226, and Calima were found to have the greatest delay in their decrease in nitrogen fixation rates based on soil water content. These four genotypes expressed substantial tolerance of nitrogen fixation to soil drying. These experiments also resulted in data on the threshold soil water contents at which transpiration rates decreased. A decrease in transpiration rates at high soil water contents is potentially advantageous since it allows soil water conservation for use as the severity of the drought increases. There was a general trend of those genotypes with sustained nitrogen fixation rates to low soil water contents also expressing decreased transpiration rates at high soil water contents.
This study identified genetic variation among common bean genotypes in their response of nitrogen fixation and transpiration to soil drying. Five genotypes (SER 16, SXB 412, NCB 226, Calima, and SEA 5) expressed the desired traits for water-limited conditions, which might be exploited in breeding efforts.
KeywordsCommon bean Drought resistance Nitrogen fixation Soil drying Transpiration
We are grateful to the Tropical Legumes I and II projects for support in the development of the drought tolerant genotypes and the identification of drought tolerance mechanisms.
- Beebe S (2013) Common bean breeding in the tropics. In: Janick J (ed) Plant Breeding Reviews (in press)Google Scholar
- Beebe SE, Rao IM, Blair MW, Acosta-Gallegos JA (2010) Phenotyping common beans for adaptation to drought. In: Ribaut JM, Monneveux P (ed) Drought phenotyping in crops: from theory to practice. Generation Challenge Program Special Issue on Phenotyping. pp 311–334Google Scholar
- Beebe S, Rao IM, Mukankusi C, Buruchara R (2012) Improving resource use efficiency and reducing risk of common bean production in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. In: Hershey C (ed) Issues in tropical agriculture. I. Eco-efficiency: from vision to reality. CIAT, Cali, Colombia (in press)Google Scholar
- Butare L, Rao IM, Lepoivre P, Cajiao C, Polania J, Cuasquer J, Beebe S (2011) Phenotypic evaluation of interspecific recombinant inbred lines (RILs) of Phaseolus species for aluminium resistance and shoot and root growth response to aluminium–toxic acid soil. Euphytica. doi: 10.1007/s10681-011-0564-1
- Diouf A, Diop TA, Gueye M (2008) Nodulation in situ of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and field outcome of an elite symbiotic association in Senegal. Res J Agric Biol Sci 4:810–818Google Scholar
- Fairbairn JN (1993) Evaluation of soils, climate and land use information at three scales: the case of low income bean farming in Latin America. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Reading, Reading, UKGoogle Scholar
- Mc Ferson JR, Bliss FA, Rosas JC (1982) Selection for enhanced nitrogen fixation in common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. In: Graham PH, Harris S (eds) Biological nitrogen fixation technology for tropical agriculture. CIAT, Call, pp 39–44Google Scholar
- Mhadhbi H, Chihaoui S, Mhamdi R, Mnasri B, Jebara M, Mhamdi R (2011) A highly osmotolerant rhizobial strain confers a better tolerance of nitrogen fixation and enhances protective activities to nodules of Phaseolus vulgaris under drought stress. Afr J Biotechnol 10:4555–4563Google Scholar
- Molina JC, Moda-Cirino V, Junior NSF, Faria RT, Destro D (2001) Response of common bean cultivars and lines to water stress. Crop Breed Appl Biotech 1:363–372Google Scholar
- Purcell LC (2009) Physiological responses of N2 fixation to drought and selecting genotypes for improved N2 fixation. In: Krishna HB, Emerich DW (eds) Nitrogen fixation in crop production. Agron Monogr 52. ASA CSSA SSSA, Madison, pp 211–238Google Scholar
- Rainey KM, Griffiths PD (2005) Differential response of common bean genotypes to high temperatures. J Am Soc Hort Sci 130:18–23Google Scholar
- Rao IM (2001) Role of physiology in improving crop adaptation to abiotic stresses in the tropics: the case of common bean and tropical forages. In: Pessarakli M (ed) Handbook of plant and crop physiology. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 583–613Google Scholar
- Serraj R, Purcell LC, Sinclair TR (1999) Symbiotic N2 fixation response to drought. J Exp Bot 50:143–155Google Scholar
- Sinclair TR, Leilah AA, Schreffler AK (1995) Peanut nitrogen fixation (C2H2 reduction) response to soil dehydration. Peanut Sci 22:162–166Google Scholar
- White JW, Singh SP (1991) Breeding for adaptation to drought. In: van Schoonhoven A, Voysest O (eds) Common beans: research for crop improvement. C.A.B. International. Wallingford, U.K. and CIAT, Cali, Colombia, pp 501–551Google Scholar