Simplified Growth Analysis of Non-climbing Dry Beans at Three Spacings in the Tropics

Abstract

Growth characteristics of dry bean genotypes of determinate (Type I), indeterminate small vine (Type II), and indeterminate large vine (Type III) types were evaluated over three spacings and two growing seasons. Important observations include: (i) Type I did not give increased yields in response to planting rows closer together in Trial II because there was a large decrease in harvest index, which did not occur for Types II and III; (2) accumulation of reproductive nodes prior to anthesis is important for high yields, as are biological yield, harvest index and leaf area; and (3) within-habit spacing combinations, factors such as flowering duration, branch-, leaf-and raceme-numbers, and stem length could not be used to predict yield.Yield responses of beans from three morphologically-different, non-climbing types, grown at three spacings, have been described for two trials at Palmira, Colombia, in 1973 and 1974. This paper describes the morphological characteristics and growth rates of these beans as they varied over habit of growth and spacing, and as they related to yield. MATERIALS AND METHODSBean varieties with Types I, II and III growth habits (determinate, indeterminate small vine and indeterminate large vine, respectively) were grown at three spacings (50 x 5, 50 x 10 and 75 x 10 cm) in three randomized complete blocks. Betweenrow spacings (50 and 75 cm) were whole-plots and combinations of growth habits (Types I, II and III) and within-row spacings (5 and 10 cm) made up the subplots of a split-plot treatment design. Each Type was represented by seven to nine genotypes in Trial I and five in Trial II. Genotypes were nested within growth habits and are listed in Table 5. All genotypes of the same habit and spacing were planted next to each other in single rows 6 m long in Trial I and in three-row 6 m long plots in Trial II.Seed and biological yields were determined by harvesting plants from two central metres of each single-row plot in Trial I and from the middle row of three-row plots in Trial II. Observations on growth analysis variables prior to final harvest, i.e. at anthesis and 20 days later, were taken from each of five consecutive plants from every experimental unit (each factorial combination of genotype, spacing and replication). This five-plant sample was removed 1 m from the end of the row that was ultimately harvested for yield determination.Analyses of variance, linear regressions and correlation analyses were computed, using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) developed by the Department of |Present address: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria. 180014-4797/79/0000-1308 S01.00

Sowing Density Effect on Common Bean Leaf Area Development

“…This finding coincides with previous studies in the common bean that up to 34% fewer leaves and 40-42% fewer branches per plant when sowing density was increased from ~13 to 40 plants m -2 across genotypes of growth habits I-III (Keuneman and Wallace, 1979). Similarly, Nienhuis and Singh (1985) also found a marked decrease of up to 50% in branches per plant and nodes per branch with increases in density from 5 to 30 plants m -2 across growth habits I-III.…”

“…In terms of the parameter estimates, given that the estimates of PLACON are, by definition, closely related to individual leaf size and the timing of the initial data collection, the larger values reported for genotypes of growth habit I coincides with previous findings in density trials reported by Keuneman and Wallace (1979) and Nienhuis and Singh (1985). PLAPOW values, on the other hand, showed more variation between densities within a given growth habit (up to ~ 18%), and were negatively correlated with PLACON values, with an average correlation coefficient between comparable components of the parameter estimates > -0.90 (data not shown).…”

Influence of plant density and growth habit of common bean on leaf area development and N accumulation

“…However, in common bean these two variables associated with carbon accumulation have not been found to be consistently associated with yield. Kueneman and Wallace (1979a) only found a consistent correlation between yield and leaf area in common bean at a 38 plants m -2 density. In the study by Kueneman and Wallace (1979b), lLeaf photosynthesis rate measured at one time during pod filling showed no correlation with yield for the growth habits and plant densities tested by Kueneman and Wallace (1979b).…”

“…In particular, four distinct growth habits have been identified in common bean: type I, determinate bush; type II, indeterminate upright; type III indeterminate prostrate; and type IV indeterminate climbing (Singh, 1981). Kueneman and Wallace (1979a) found leaf area index of common bean was to be lower in Type I genotypes than in Types II and III. They also included plant density in their experiments, and found lower leaf area index at a plant density of 13.5 plants m -2 than for canopies grown at densities of 18 and 38 plants m -2 .…”

Modification of Plant Architecture and Crop Yield by Breeding1

“…The yield increase of 'Redkloud' was attributed to fewer leaves and more vertical orientation of the leaflets (13). In the tropics, Kueneman and Wallace (33) observed that the geno types with an indeterminate plant habit had a higher yield than the deter minate types under narrow row spacing mainly because branching was sup pressed and the indeterminate types had more pods borne on the main stem than the determinate types.…”