Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is the most important legume and is second only to maize as a food crop in Kenya. Despite its importance, bean productivity is declining in western Kenya due to several biotic and abiotic constraints including several fungal diseases. Among these diseases, angular leaf spot (Phaeoisariopsis griseola (Sacc.) is one of the most damaging and widely distributed diseases of common bean, causing yield losses as high as 80%. Furthermore, the problem is compounded by limited information on pathogen distribution and variability in western Kenya hindering breeding for angular leaf spot (ALS) resistance. Therefore, this study was carried out to characterise the ALS pathogen (Phaeoisariopsis griseola) (Sacc.) into different pathotypes. Forty-two isolates of P. griseola were collected from different bean growing areas of western Kenya and characterized into six pathotypes (63:11, 30:26, 33:23, 63:7, 31:10 and 63:63) by use of 12 differential cultivars. Advanced lines and commercial varieties obtained from KALRO-Kakamega were separately inoculated with six pathotypes of P. griseola and evaluated for disease reaction in the screenhouse. A screening trial of Mesoamerican and Andean bean genotypes showed that two varieties were tolerant (disease scores 1 to 3), fourteen varieties were moderately resistant (scores 4 to 6) and four varieties were susceptible (7 to 9). The tolerant varieties were small-seeded, while the susceptible varieties were mostly large-seeded.
| Published in | International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences (Volume 2, Issue 6) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13 |
| Page(s) | 92-98 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2016. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Beans, Pathotypes, Phaeoisariopsis griseola, Severity
| [1] | Hadi, H., Kazem, G. G., Farrokh, K., Mostafa, V. and Mohammed, S. 2006. Response of common bean (Phaeseolus vulgaris L.) to different levels of shade. J. Argon. 5: 595-599. |
| [2] | Beebe, E. S., Rao, M. I., Devi, J. M., and Polania, J. 2014. Common beans, biodiversity, and multiple stresses: challenges of drought resistance in tropical soils. Crop and Pasture Science 65(7): 667-675. |
| [3] | Mauyo, L.W., Okalebo, J. R., Kirby, R. A., Buruchara, R., M., Ugen, M. A. and Musebe, R. O. 2007. Legal and institutional constraints to Kenya-Uganda cross-border bean marketing. African Journal of Agricultural Research 2: 578-582. |
| [4] | Kiiya, W. W. 1997. A review of production practices and constraints for grain legumes with special emphasis on dry beans. In: Rees, D. J. and C. Nkonge (eds). A review of agricultural practices and constraints in the North Rift Valley Province, Kitale, Kenya. 26 - 28 Sept. 1995: 60-83. |
| [5] | Muasya, R. M. 2001. Crop physiological analysis of seed quality variation in common Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.),” Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, the Netherlands. |
| [6] | Hillocks, R. J., Madata, C. S., Chirwa, R., Minja, E. M. and Msolla, S. 2006. Phaseolus bean improvement in Tanzania 1959-2005. Euphyta 150: 225-231. |
| [7] | Spilsbury, J., Jagwe, J. and Wanda, K. 2004. Evaluating the marketing opportunities for beans and its products in the principle beans growing countries of ASARECA, draft regional report compiled by International Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Food net. |
| [8] | Buruchara, R., Chirwa, R., Sperling, L., Mukankus, I. C., Rubyogo, J. C., Muthoni, R. and Abang, M. M. 2011. Development and delivery of bean varieties in africa: The pan- Africa bean research alliance (PABRA) model. African Crop Science Journal 19 (4): 227–245. |
| [9] | FAOSTAT. 2014. Food and agriculture organization at http://faostat.fao.org. |
| [10] | Nderitu, J. N. and Otsyula, R. M. 1997. Survey of bean root rots, bean stem maggot, soil fertility and management practices in farmer’s fields. Annual report RRC Kakamega. 32pp. |
| [11] | Otsyula, R. M., Ajanga, S. I., Buruchara, R. A. and Wortman, C. S. 1998. Developments of an integrated bean root rot control strategy for western Kenya. African Crop Science Journal 6: 61-67. |
| [12] | Sartorato, A. 2004. Pathogenic variability and genetic diversity of Phaeoisariopsis griseola isolates from two counties in the State of Goias, Brazil. J Phytopathol 152: 385–390. |
| [13] | Sebastian, A., Stenglein, I., Pedro, A. and Balatti, A. 2006. Genetic diversity of Phaeoisariopsis griseola in Argentina as revealed by pathogenic and molecular markers. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 68: 158-167. |
| [14] | Guzman, P., Gepts, P., Temple, S., Mkandawire, A. B. C. and Gilbertson, R. L. 1999. Detection and differentiation of Phaeoisariopsis griseola isolates with the polymerase chain reaction and group-specific primers. Plant Disease 83: 37–42. |
| [15] | Mahuku, G. S., Henriquez, M. A., Munoz, J. And Buruchara, R. A. 2002a. Molecular markers dispute the existence of the Afro-Andean group of the bean angular leaf spot pathogen. Phaeoisariopsis griseola. Phytopathology 92: 580-589. |
| [16] | Mahuku, G. S., Jara, C., Cuasquer, J. B. and Castellanos, G. 2002b. Genetic variability within Phaeoisariopsis griseola from Central America and its implication for resistance breeding of common bean. Plant Patholology 51: 594-604. |
| [17] | Wagara, I. N., Mwang’ombe, A. W., Kimenju, J. W. and Buruchara, R. A. 2005. Virulence, variability and physiological races of the angular leaf spot pathogen. Phaeoisariopsis griseola in Kenya. African Plant Protection 11: 23-31. |
| [18] | Pastor-Corrales, M. A. and Jara, C. E., 1995. La evolución de Phaeoisariopsis griseola con el frijol común en América Latina. Fitopatología Colombiana 19: 15-24. |
| [19] | Pastor-Corrales, M. A, Jara, C. and Singh, S. P. 1998. Pathogenic variation in sources of and breeding for resistance to Phaeoisariopsis griseola causing angular leaf spot in common bean. Euphytica 103: 161-171. |
| [20] | Wakahiu, M. W. 2000. Assessment of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv-Rosecoco GLP-2 seed for infection/contamination by Macrophomina phaseolina and its implication on disease incidence and severity. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Nairobi, pp: 127. |
| [21] | Mwaniki, A. W. 2002. Assessment of bean production constraints and seed quality and health of improved common bean seed. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Nairobi, pp: 113. |
| [22] | Wachenje, C. W. 2002. Bean production constraints, bean seed quality and effect of intercropping on floury leaf spot disease and yields in Taita Taveta district, Kenya. MSc thesis, University of Nairobi, Kenya. |
| [23] | Allen, D. J., Ampofo, K. K. O. and Wortmann, C. S. 1996. Pest, diseases and nutritional disorders of the common bean in Africa: A field guide. CIAT publication No. 260: 53-54. |
| [24] | Wagara I. N, Mwang’ombe A. W, Kimenju J. W, Buruchara R. A, Jamnadass R and Majiwa P. A. O 2004. Genetic diversity of Phaeoisariopsis griseola in Kenya as revealed by AFLP and group-specific primers. Journal of Phytopathology 152: 1–8. |
| [25] | Van Schoonhoven, A. and Pastor-Corrales, M. A. 1987. Standard system for the evaluation of bean germplasm. C. I. A. T., Cali, Colombia. |
| [26] | Sartorato A. 2002. Identification of Phaeoisariopsis griseola pathotypes from five states in Brazil. Fitopatol Bras 27:78–81. |
| [27] | Orozco, S. and Araya, C. M. 2005. Variabilidade patogenica de Phaeoisariopsis griseola na Costa Rica. Fitopatol Bras 30: 589–593. |
| [28] | Jara, C., Castellano, G., Mahuku, G. 2001. Estado actual y proyeccio´ n de la investigacio´ n relacionada com la mancha angular del frijol (Phaeoisariopsis griseola). Fitopatol Colomb 25: 1–6. |
| [29] | Leung H, Nelson R. J, Leach J. E. 1993. Population structure of plant pathogenic fungi & bacteria. Advances in plant patholpgy.10.157-205. |
| [30] | Sartorato, A., Nietsche, S., Barros, E. G. and Moreira, M. A. 2000. RAPD and SCAR markers linked to resistance gene to angular leaf spot in common beans. Fitopatol Bras 25:637-642. |
| [31] | Oshone K., Gebeyehu S. and K. Tesfaye. 2014. Assessment of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) seed quality produced under different cropping system by small holder farmers in eastern Ethiopia. African Journal of Food, Agriculture Nutrition and Development, 14: (1) 8566-8584. |
| [32] | Dube, E., Sibiya, J. and Fanadzo, M. 2014. Early planting and hand sorting effectively controls seed-borne fungi in farm-retained bean seed. South Africa Journal of Science, 110:11-12. |
| [33] | Njuki, S. K. and Andersson, P. 2014. Farmer participatory evaluation of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) varieties for seed production in Teso-karamoja Sub-region, Uganda. International Journal of Research in Agriculture and Food Sciences, 3(2): 13-27. |
| [34] | Liebenberg, M. M. and Pretorius, Z. A. 1997. A review of angular leaf spot of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). African Plant Protection 3: 81-106. |
| [35] | CIAT.1996. Bean program annual report, 39–49. CIAT, Cali, Colombia. |
APA Style
Robert Kiptabut Leitich, D. O. Omayio, B. Mukoye, B. C. Mangeni, D. W. Wosula, et al. (2016). Pathogenic Variability of Angular Leaf Spot Disease of Common Bean in Western Kenya. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences, 2(6), 92-98. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13
ACS Style
Robert Kiptabut Leitich; D. O. Omayio; B. Mukoye; B. C. Mangeni; D. W. Wosula, et al. Pathogenic Variability of Angular Leaf Spot Disease of Common Bean in Western Kenya. Int. J. Appl. Agric. Sci. 2016, 2(6), 92-98. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13
AMA Style
Robert Kiptabut Leitich, D. O. Omayio, B. Mukoye, B. C. Mangeni, D. W. Wosula, et al. Pathogenic Variability of Angular Leaf Spot Disease of Common Bean in Western Kenya. Int J Appl Agric Sci. 2016;2(6):92-98. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13,
author = {Robert Kiptabut Leitich and D. O. Omayio and B. Mukoye and B. C. Mangeni and D. W. Wosula and W. Arinaitwe and R. M. Otsyula and H. K. Were and M. M. Abang},
title = {Pathogenic Variability of Angular Leaf Spot Disease of Common Bean in Western Kenya},
journal = {International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences},
volume = {2},
number = {6},
pages = {92-98},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijaas.20160206.13},
abstract = {Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is the most important legume and is second only to maize as a food crop in Kenya. Despite its importance, bean productivity is declining in western Kenya due to several biotic and abiotic constraints including several fungal diseases. Among these diseases, angular leaf spot (Phaeoisariopsis griseola (Sacc.) is one of the most damaging and widely distributed diseases of common bean, causing yield losses as high as 80%. Furthermore, the problem is compounded by limited information on pathogen distribution and variability in western Kenya hindering breeding for angular leaf spot (ALS) resistance. Therefore, this study was carried out to characterise the ALS pathogen (Phaeoisariopsis griseola) (Sacc.) into different pathotypes. Forty-two isolates of P. griseola were collected from different bean growing areas of western Kenya and characterized into six pathotypes (63:11, 30:26, 33:23, 63:7, 31:10 and 63:63) by use of 12 differential cultivars. Advanced lines and commercial varieties obtained from KALRO-Kakamega were separately inoculated with six pathotypes of P. griseola and evaluated for disease reaction in the screenhouse. A screening trial of Mesoamerican and Andean bean genotypes showed that two varieties were tolerant (disease scores 1 to 3), fourteen varieties were moderately resistant (scores 4 to 6) and four varieties were susceptible (7 to 9). The tolerant varieties were small-seeded, while the susceptible varieties were mostly large-seeded.},
year = {2016}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Pathogenic Variability of Angular Leaf Spot Disease of Common Bean in Western Kenya AU - Robert Kiptabut Leitich AU - D. O. Omayio AU - B. Mukoye AU - B. C. Mangeni AU - D. W. Wosula AU - W. Arinaitwe AU - R. M. Otsyula AU - H. K. Were AU - M. M. Abang Y1 - 2016/11/08 PY - 2016 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13 DO - 10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13 T2 - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences JF - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences JO - International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences SP - 92 EP - 98 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2469-7885 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaas.20160206.13 AB - Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is the most important legume and is second only to maize as a food crop in Kenya. Despite its importance, bean productivity is declining in western Kenya due to several biotic and abiotic constraints including several fungal diseases. Among these diseases, angular leaf spot (Phaeoisariopsis griseola (Sacc.) is one of the most damaging and widely distributed diseases of common bean, causing yield losses as high as 80%. Furthermore, the problem is compounded by limited information on pathogen distribution and variability in western Kenya hindering breeding for angular leaf spot (ALS) resistance. Therefore, this study was carried out to characterise the ALS pathogen (Phaeoisariopsis griseola) (Sacc.) into different pathotypes. Forty-two isolates of P. griseola were collected from different bean growing areas of western Kenya and characterized into six pathotypes (63:11, 30:26, 33:23, 63:7, 31:10 and 63:63) by use of 12 differential cultivars. Advanced lines and commercial varieties obtained from KALRO-Kakamega were separately inoculated with six pathotypes of P. griseola and evaluated for disease reaction in the screenhouse. A screening trial of Mesoamerican and Andean bean genotypes showed that two varieties were tolerant (disease scores 1 to 3), fourteen varieties were moderately resistant (scores 4 to 6) and four varieties were susceptible (7 to 9). The tolerant varieties were small-seeded, while the susceptible varieties were mostly large-seeded. VL - 2 IS - 6 ER -
Information
Email: