Common bean genotypes for agronomic and market-related traits in VCU trials

Authors

  • Alisson Fernando Chiorato Agronomic Institute
  • Sérgio Augusto Morais Carbonell Agronomic Institute
  • Fátima Bosetti Agronomic Institute
  • Graziele Ramos Sasseron Agronomic Institute
  • Rodrigo Lorencetti Tunes Lopes Agronomic Institute
  • Cleber Vinícius Giaretta Azevedo Agronomic Institute

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-9016-2013-0172

Abstract

Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU) trials are undertaken when evaluating improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) lines, and knowledge of agronomic and market-related traits and disease reaction is instrumental in making cultivar recommendations. This study evaluates the yield, cooking time, grain color and reaction to anthracnose (Colletotrichum lindemuthianum), Fusarium wilt (Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. phaseoli) and Curtobacterium wilt (Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. flaccumfaciens) of 25 common bean genotypes derived from the main common bean breeding programs in Brazil. Seventeen VCU trials were carried out in the rainy season, dry season and winter season from 2009 to 2011 in the state of São Paulo. Analyses of grain color and cooking time were initiated 60 days after harvest, and disease reaction analyses were performed in the laboratory under controlled conditions. In terms of yield, no genotype superior to the controls was observed for any of the seasons under consideration. Grains from the dry season exhibited better color, while the rainy season led to the shortest cooking times. The following genotypes BRS Esteio, BRS Esplendor and IAC Imperador were resistant to anthracnose, Fusarium wilt and Curtobacterium wilt and, in general, genotypes with lighter-colored grains were more susceptible to anthracnose and Fusarium wilt.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2015-02-01

Issue

Section

Genetics and Plant Breeding

How to Cite

Common bean genotypes for agronomic and market-related traits in VCU trials . (2015). Scientia Agricola, 72(1), 34-40. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-9016-2013-0172