Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:11:57.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Genetic diversity of bean (Phaseolus) landraces and wild relatives from the primary centre of origin of the Southern Andes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2012

Teresa Avila
Affiliation:
Biotechnology Unit, CIFP – Pairumani Center for Phytogenetic Research, Casilla Correo 128, Cochabamba, Bolivia Université Catholique de Louvain, Earth and Life Institute, Croix du Sud 2, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Matthew W. Blair*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Cornell University, 242 Emerson Hall, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ximena Reyes
Affiliation:
Biotechnology Unit, CIFP – Pairumani Center for Phytogenetic Research, Casilla Correo 128, Cochabamba, Bolivia
Pierre Bertin
Affiliation:
Université Catholique de Louvain, Earth and Life Institute, Croix du Sud 2, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mwblair2011@gmail.com

Abstract

The Southern Andes, especially the inter-Andean valleys of south Bolivia, is thought to be a probable point of domestication within the primary centre of diversity for Andean common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). The national Phaseolus germplasm collection of Bolivia is maintained by the Pairumani Foundation and consists of 449 accessions where most of the accessions are of common bean but some are of related cultivated and wild species. The goal of this study was to determine the genetic diversity of this collection by sampling 174 accessions of P. vulgaris and an outgroup of eight Phaseolus augusti, two Phaseolus lunatus and one Phaseolus coccineus genotype. The genetic diversity and population structure were estimated using 29 microsatellite markers. High levels of polymorphism were found, with a total of 311 alleles identified and an average of 10.7 alleles per marker. Correspondence analysis and an unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean-based dendrogram distinguished P. vulgaris from the other species of Phaseolus. Common bean accessions were separated into two groups: the first one including Andean controls and most accessions from high altitudes with morphological characteristics and growth habits typical of this gene pool; the second one including Mesoamerican controls and accessions from low altitudes. Inside the Andean gene pool, the wild accessions were diverse and separated from the weedy and cultivated accessions. Low geographical distances between collection sites (up to 100 km) were shown to be related to low genetic distances. These results are important for the conservation of common beans in the Southern Andes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2012

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

Avila, A, Avila, G, Brandolini, A and Rojas, A (1987) Estudios de clasificación de germoplasma de Chuwi (Phaseolus vulgaris). Investigaciones sobre el mejoramiento genético y cultural de trigo duro, girasol, maíz, frijol, lupino y haba en Bolivia. IILA, Roma, Italia.Google Scholar
Becerra, V and Gepts, P (1994) RFLP diversity of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in its centres of origin. Genome 37: 256263.Google Scholar
Beebe, S, Toro, O, Gonzáles, AV, Chacón, MI and Debouck, D (1997) Wild-weed-crop complexes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L., Fabaceae) in the Andes of Peru and Colombia, and their implications for conservation and breeding. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 44: 7391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, S, Rengifo, J, Gaitán, E, Duque, MC and Tohme, J (2001) Diversity and origin of Andean landraces of common bean. Crop Science 41: 854862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, MW, Pedraza, F, Buendía, HF, Gaitán, E, Beebe, S, 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: 13621374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Giraldo, MC, Buendía, HF, Tovar, E, Duque, MC and Beebe, S (2006) Microsatellite marker diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 113: 100109.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: 2943.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Díaz, LM, Buendía, 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: 955972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowcock, AM, Ruiz-Linares, A, Tomforde, J, Minch, E, Kidd, JR and Cavalli-Sforza, L (1994) High resolution of human evolutionary trees with polymorphic microsatellites. Nature 368: 455457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broughton, WJ, Hernández, G, Blair, M, Beebe, S, Gepts, P and Vanderleyden, J (2003) Bean (Phaseolus spp.) – model food legumes. Plant and Soil 252: 55128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caicedo, AL, Gaitán, E, Duque, MC, Toro, O, Debouck, DG and Tohme, J (1999) AFLP fingerprinting of Phaseolus lunatus L. and related wild species from South America. Crop Science 39: 14971507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chacón, MI, Pickersgill, B and Debouck, DG (2005) Domestication patterns in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and the origin of Mesoamerican and Andean cultivated races. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 110: 432444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chacón, MI, Pickersgill, B, Debouck, DG and Arias, S (2007) Phylogeographic analysis of the chloroplast DNA variation in wild common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in the Americas. Plant Systematics and Evolution 266: 175195.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: 143154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fofana, B, Baudoin, JP, Vekemans, X, Debouck, DG and du Jardín, P (1999) Molecular evidence for an Andean origin and a secondary gene pool for the Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.) using chloroplast DNA. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 202212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freyre, R, Ríos, R, Guzmán, L, Debouck, D and Gepts, P (1996) Ecogeographic distribution of Phaseolus spp. (Fabaceae) in Bolivia. Economic Botany 50: 195215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaitán-Solís, E, Duque, MC, Edwards, KJ and Tohme, J (2002) Microsatellite repeats in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.): isolation, characterization, and cross-species amplification in Phaseolus spp. Crop Science 42: 21282136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galván, MZ, Menéndez-Sevillano, MC, De Ron, AM, Santalla, M and Balatti, PA (2006) Genetic diversity among wild beans from northwestern Argentina based on morpho-agronomic and RAPD data. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 53: 891900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gepts, P and Debouck, DG (1991) Origin, domestication and evolution of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). In: van Schoonhoven, A and Voysest, O (eds) Common Beans: Research for Crop Improvement. Wallingford/Colombia: CAB International/CIAT, pp. 753.Google Scholar
Gepts, P, Osborn, T, Rashka, K and Bliss, F (1986) Phaseolin–protein variability in wild forms and landraces of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.): evidence for multiple centers of domestication. Economic Botany 40: 451468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig, R and Gepts, P (1989) Allozyme diversity in wild Phaseolus vulgaris: further evidence for two major centers of genetic diversity. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 78: 809817.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mantel, N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research 27: 209220.Google Scholar
Minch, E (1997) MICROSAT. Release 1.5d. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Medical Center.Google Scholar
Papa, R and Gepts, P (2003) Asymmetry of gene flow and differential geographical structure of molecular diversity in wild and domesticated common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from Mesoamerica. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 106: 239250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papa, R, Acosta, JA, Delgado-Salinas, A and Gepts, P (2005) A genome-wide analysis of differentiation between wild and domesticated Phaseolus vulgaris from Mesoamerica. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 111: 11471158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peakall, R and Smouse, PE (2005) GenAlEx 6: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Australian National University, Canberra.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pissard, A, Arbizu, C, Ghislain, M, Faux, AM, Paulet, S and Bertin, P (2008) Congruence between morphological and molecular markers inferred from the analysis of the intra-morphotype genetic diversity and the spatial structure of Oxalis tuberosa. Molecular Genetics 132: 7185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pritchard, JK, Stehens, M and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multi-locus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohlf, F (2002) NTSYS pc: Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System. Setauket, NY: Exeter Publishing.Google Scholar
Singh, S, Gepts, P and Debouck, DG (1991) Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Economic Botany 45: 379396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smouse, PE and Peakall, R (1999) Spatial autocorrelation analysis of individual multiallele and multilocus genetic structure. Heredity 82: 561573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tohme, J, Toro, O, Vargas, J and Debouck, D (1995) Variability in Andean Nuña common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Economic Botany 49: 7895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tohme, J, Gonzáles, DO, Beebe, S and Duque, MC (1996) AFLP analysis of gene pools of a wild bean core collection. Crop Science 36: 13751384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, K, Park, J, Poysa, V and Gepts, P (2000) Integration of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers into a molecular linkage map of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Heredity 91: 429434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed