Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:23:44.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic diversity of two Indian common bean germplasm collections based on morphological and microsatellite markers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2013

P. N. Sharma ,
L. M. Díaz  and
M. W. Blair
P. N. Sharma
Affiliation:
Molecular Plant Pathology Laboratory, Department of Plant Pathology, CSK HP Agricultural University, Palampur176062, HP, India
L. M. Díaz
Affiliation:
Generation Challenge Program, CGIAR, CIAT, AA6713, Cali, Colombia
M. W. Blair*
Affiliation:
Generation Challenge Program, CGIAR, CIAT, AA6713, Cali, Colombia Departamento de Ciencias Agricolas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, via Chapinero, Km 8, Palmira, Valle, Colombia Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Cornell University, 242 Emerson Hall, Ithaca, New York14853, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

India is the second most populous nation in the world after China, and its plant genetic resources are an important basis for crop improvement to meet human population needs. An important legume in the diet of the Indian population is common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Common beans are one of the many important legumes grown in India, but unlike others, its centre of origin is not in Asia but in the Americas. The objective of this study was to evaluate two collections of Indian common beans: one for an internationally available collection of Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)-protected accessions and one from the north-western Himalayan region. In total, 149 Indian landraces were evaluated with a total of 24 microsatellites across the two collections, and these represented all common bean-growing states of India. A population structure analysis was used to find groups in each collection, and this was compared across the collections. The genetic analysis of the two sets of Indian accessions with neighbour-joining trees and principal component analysis categorized the landraces into Andean and Mesoamerican gene pool groups. The Andean genotypes dominated the north-western Himalayan collection while the FAO-protected accessions were predominantly Mesoamerican. The Indian subcontinent can be considered as a region of high bean diversity; however, very little introgression was observed between the gene pools in both the germplasm sets. Gene pool identity was further substantiated by the comparison of seed traits, particularly seed size. The role of the landraces in plant breeding programmes is discussed.

Keywords

Andean and Mesoamerican gene poolsIndian subcontinentmorphological diversitysimple sequence repeat markers
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , August 2013 , pp. 121 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2013 

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

Afanador, L, Hadley, S and Kelly, JD (1993) Adoption of a mini-prep DNA extraction method for RAPD marker analysis in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Bean Improvement Cooperative 36: 10–11.Google Scholar
Asfaw, A, Blair, MW and Almekinders, C (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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becerra, V, Paredes, M, Rojo, C, Díaz, LM and Blair, MW (2010) Microsatellite marker characterization of Chilean common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm. Crop Science 50: 1–10.Google Scholar
Blair, MW, Pedraza, F, Buendia, HF, Gaitán-Solís, E, Beebe, SE, Gepts, P and Tohme, J (2003) Development of a genome-wide anchored microsatellite map for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 107: 1362–1374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Giraldo, MC, Buendia, HF, Tovar, E, Duque, MC and Beebe, SE (2006) Microsatellite marker diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 113: 100–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Díaz, JM, Hidalgo, R, Díaz, LM and Duque, MC (2007) Microsatellite characterization of Andean races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 116: 29–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Díaz, LM, Buendia, HF and Duque, MC (2009) Genetic diversity, seed size associations and population structure of a core collection of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 119: 955–973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair MW, Gonzales LF, Kimani P, Butare L (2010) Inter-genepool introgression, genetic diversity and nutritional quality of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces from Central Africa. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 121: 237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broughton, WJ, Hernandez, G, Blair, MW, Beebe, SE, Gepts, P and Vanderleyden, J (2003) Beans (Phaseolus spp.) – model food legumes. Plant and Soil 252: 55–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, MW, Díaz, LM, Gil-Langarica, H, Mayek Perez, N and Acosta, JA (2011) Genetic relatedness of Mexican common bean varieties revealed by microsatellite markers. Crop Science 51: 2655–2667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burle, ML, Fonseca, JR, Kami, JA and Gepts, P (2010) Microsatellite diversity and genetic structure among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces in Brazil, a secondary center of diversity. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 121: 801–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz, LM and Blair, MW (2006) Race structure within the Mesoamerican gene pool of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) as determined by microsatellite markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 114: 143–154.Google Scholar
Díaz, LM, Buendía, HF, Duque, MC and Blair, MW (2011) Genetic diversity of Colombian landraces of common bean as detected through the use of silver-stained and fluorescently labeled microsatellites. Plant Genetic Resources 9: 86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evano, G, Regnaut, S and Goudet, J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Molecular Ecology 14: 2611–2620.Google Scholar
Ferguson, ME, Bramel, PJ and Chandra, S (2004) Gene diversity among botanical varieties in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Crop Science 44: 1847–1854.Google Scholar
Garris, AJ, Tai, TH, Coburn, J, Kresovich, S and McCouch, S (2005) Genetic structure and diversity in Oryza sativa L. Genetics 169: 1631–1638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gepts, P and Debouck, D (1991) Origin, domestication and evolution of the common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). In: Schoonhoven, A and Voysest, O (eds) Common Beans: Research for Crop Improvement. Wallingford: CAB International, pp. 7–54.Google Scholar
Goméz, O, Blair, MW, Frankow-Lindberg, B and Gullberg, U (2004) Molecular and phenotypic diversity of common bean landraces from Nicaragua. Crop Science 4: 1412–1418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jose, FC, Mohammed, MMS, Thomas, G, Varghese, G, Selvaraj, N and Dorai, M (2009) Genetic diversity and conservation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L., Fabaceae) landraces in Nilgiris. Current Science 97: 227–234.Google Scholar
Koenig, R and Gepts, P (1989) Allozyme diversity in wild Phaseolus vulgaris: further evidence for two mayor centers of genetic diversity. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 78: 809–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, V, Sharma, S, Sharma, AK, Kumar, M, Sharma, S, Malik, S, Singh, KP, Sanger, RS and Bhat, KV (2008) Genetic diversity in Indian common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) using random amplified polymorphic DNA markers. Physiological Molecular Biology of Plants 14: 383–387.Google Scholar
Kwak, M, Kami, JA and Gepts, P (2009) The putative Mesoamerican domestication center of Phaseolus vulgaris is located in the Lerma-Santiago basin of Mexico. Crop Science 49: 554–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, K and Muse, S (2005) Power Marker: integrated analysis environment for genetic marker data. Bioinformatics 21: 2128–2129.Google Scholar
Martin, GB and Adams, MW (1987) Landraces of Phaseolus vulgaris (Fabaceae) in northern Malawi. II. Generation and maintenance of variability. Economic Botany 41: 204–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masi, P, Spagnoletti, ZP and Donini, P (2003) Development and analysis of multiplex microsatellite markers sets in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Molecular Breeding 11: 303–313.Google Scholar
Métais, I, Hamon, B, Jalouzot, R and Peltier, D (2002) Structure and level of genetic diversity in various bean types evidenced with microsatellite markers isolated from a genomic enriched library. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104: 1346–1352.Google Scholar
Mitchell, SE, Kresovich, S, Jester, CA, Hernandez, CJ and Szewc-McFadden, AK (1997) Application of multiplex-PR and fluorescence based, semi-automated allele sizing technology for genotyping plant genetic resources. Crop Science 37: 617–624.Google Scholar
Pathania, A, Sharma, PN and Sharma, OP (2006) Evaluation of resistance sources and genetics of resistance in kidney bean to Indian virulences of Colletotrichum lindemuthianum. Euphytica 149: 97–103.Google Scholar
Payró de la Cruz, P, Gepts, P, Garcia Marín, PC and Villareal, DZ (2005) Spatial distribution of genetic diversity in wild populations of Phaseolus vulgaris L. from Guanajuato and Michoacán, México. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 52: 589–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, W, Machray, GC and Provan, J (1996) Polymorphism revealed by simple sequence repeats. Trends in Plant Science 1: 215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, M and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945–959.Google Scholar
Rodiño, AP, Santalla, M, González, MA, de Ron, AM and Singh, SP (2006) Novel genetic variation in common bean from the Iberian Peninsula. Crop Science 46: 2540–2546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohlf F (2002) NTSYS pc. Numerical Taxonomy System Exeter Publishing, Setauket, NY.Google Scholar
Santalla, M, Rodiño, AP and De Ron, AM (2002) Allozyme evidence supporting southwestern Europe as a secondary center of genetic diversity for the common bean. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104: 934–944.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santalla, M, Menéndez-Sevillano, M, Monteagudo, A and De Ron, A (2003) Genetic diversity of Argentinean common bean and its evolution during domestication. Euphytica 135: 75–87.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (1996) SAS/STAT Users guide 6.11. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Sharma, TR, Rana, JC, Sharma, R, Rathore, R and Sharma, PN (2006) Genetic diversity analysis of exotic and Indian accessions of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) using RAPD markers. Indian Journal of Genetics 66: 275–278.Google Scholar
Singh SP, Gepts P, Debouck DG (1991a) Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Economic Botany 45: 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, SP, Molina A, Urrea C, Gepts P (1991b) Genetic diversity in cultivated Phaseolus vulgaris. II. Marker-based analysis of morphological and agronomic traits. Crop Science 31: 23–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh SP, Nodari R, Gepts P (1991c) Genetic diversity in cultivated common bean: I. Allozymes. Crop Science 31: 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiwari, M, Singh, NK, Rathore, M and Kumar, N (2005) RAPD markers in the analysis of genetic diversity among common bean germplasm from central Himalaya. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 52: 315–324.Google Scholar
Vavilov, NI (1951) The Origin, Variation, Immunity and Breeding of Cultivated Plants. Waltham, MA: Chronica Botanica.Google Scholar
Yeh, FY, Boyle, R, Ye, T and Mao, Z (1997) POPGENE, the User-friendly Shareware for Population Genetic Analysis, Version 1.31. Alberta: Molecular Biology and Biotechnology Centre, University of Alberta.Google Scholar
Zhang, X, Blair, MW and Wang, S (2008) Genetic diversity of Chinese common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces assessed with simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 117: 629–640.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Sharma Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Sharma Supplementary Material(File)
File 727.9 KB