BIBLIOGRAPHY MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY

MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012. Bean Common Mosaic Virus
Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean. Benguet State University, La Trinidad Benguet.

Adviser: Julio S. Ligat, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT

The experiment was conducted under Greenhouse condition at Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet from August 2010 to March 2011. The study aimed to
assess the reaction of different cultivars of bean against Bean common mosaic virus
through sap inoculation and to determine the symptoms of mosaic virus on the different
cultivar of beans.

The type of symptoms produced was determined by the stain of bean common
mosaic virus, temperature and the host genotype. BCMV may incite three types of
symptoms: mosaic, systemic necrosis (black rot), or local lesions (malformation).
Symptoms associated with common mosaic virus include leaf rolling or blistering, light
and dark green patches on the leaf (green mosaic), chlorotic vein banding, yellow mosaic
and growth reduction.
Based on the results, the Black Valentine cultivar had the highest severity of Bean
common mosaic virus and the lowest incidence of Bean common mosaic virus was
recorded in Blue lake cultivar had the lowest severity of Bean common mosaic virus. Also,
highest incidence of bean common mosaic virus was observed in maroon cultivar.
Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Symptomatological Observations on
The Different Bean Cultivar

The different bean cultivars that were mechanically inoculated with bean common
mosaic virus were rated visually on the severity of the disease (Table 1). Most of the bean
cultivars: Black Valentine (Figure 3), Blue Lake (Figure 4), Burik (Figure 5), Maroon
cultivar (Figure 6) and Stone Hill Brown (Figure 7) had low virus infection. Taichung
cultivar (Figure 8) had moderate susceptibility against the virus.. Maccarao cultivar (Figure
9) was the most susceptible.

Table 1. Reaction of the different bean cultivar against mechanically inoculated bean

common mosaic virus.

CULTIVAR
DISEASE SEVERITY


Untreated
0.00 no disease


Black valentine
+ low


Blue lake


+ low


Burik
+ low


Maccarao
+++ severity


Maroon
+ low


Stone hill brown
+ low

Taichung ++ moderate








Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012




Figure 1. Uninoculated bean plant. Figure 2.Bean common mosaic infected
plant.




Figure 3. Black Valentine cultivar had low infection against Bean common mosaic virus.






Figure 4. Blue Lake cultivar had low infection against Bean common mosaic virus.


Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012



Figure 5. Burik cultivar had low infection against Bean common mosaic virus.




Figure 6. Maroon cultivar had low infection against Bean common mosaic virus.





Figure 7. Stone Hill brown cultivar had low infection against Bean common mosaic

virus

Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012





Figure 8. Taichung Cultivar had moderate infection against Bean common mosaic

virus




Figure 9. Maccarao cultivar had the highest infection against Bean common mosaic virus.


Bean Common Mosaic Virus Incidence

Black Valentine cultivar had the lowest bean common mosaic virus incidence
(Table 2 and Figure 10). Maroon cultivar (Figure 6) had the highest virus incidence.
Common bean (Phaseoluss Vulgaris L.), also referred to as dry bean, is an annual
leguminous plant that belongs to the genus phaseolous with pinnately compound trifoliate
large leaves it is largely as self-pollinated plant though cross-pollination is possible if the
stigma contacts with pollen coated bee when extended. Seeds are none dospermic and vary
greatly in size and colour from the small black wild type to the large
Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012

Table 2. Incidence of bean common mosaic virus on mechanically inoculated different
bean cultivars

CULTIVAR






MEAN



Black valentine
50.0a

Blue lake
55.0a

Burik
52.5a

Maccarao
70.0a

Maroon
72.5a

Stone hill brown
70.0a

Taichung
55.0a





























white, brown, red, black, blue or mottled seeds of varieties, which are 7-16 mm long
(Cobley and Steele, 1976 ).
Bevoric et al (1996) reported that bean plants are the host for a number of viruses
like common mosaic virus which is known to be transmitted by seeds. The incidence of
virus diseases was conformed on a considerable number of seeds. Transmission ranges
from 20% to 26%. Based on the results obtained it can be concluded the virus disease bean
seeds play a major role in further disease spread.



Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Black
Blue Lake
Burik
Maccarao Maroon Stone Hill Taichung
Valentine
Brown



Figure 10. Incidence of bean common mosaic virus on mechanically inoculated different
bean cultivars


Severity of Bean Common Mosaic Virus
on Different Cultivars of Bean

Blue Lake cultivar had the lowest bean common mosaic virus infection (Table 3
and Figure 11). Maroon and Maccarao cultivars had the highest virus infection.
Phaseolus Vulgaris L. Sensitive cultivars usually develop a characteristic systemic
mosaic. Some cultivars develop necrotic local lesions with certain strains of the virus
(Zaumeyer & Goth 1963). Leaves of hypersensitive cultivars (e.g. Topcrop) detached after
inoculation and incubated on moist filter paper in closed Petri dishes under artificial light
at 30-32°C may develop necrotic local lesions after 2-3 days (Quartz, 1957-1958).

Table 3. Severity of bean common mosaic virus on mechanically inoculated different
bean cultivars
Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012


CULTIVAR






MEAN


Black valentine
15a
Blue lake
8c
Burik
8.25c
Maccarao
14ab
Maroon
14ab
Stone hill brown
13ab
Taichung
10bc







16
15
14
13
12
11
109876543210
Black
Blue Lake
Burik
Maccarao
Maroon Stone Hill Taichung
Valentine
Brown


Figure 11. Incidence (%) of bean common mosaic virus on sap inoculated different
cultivars of bean.



Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary
The study was conducted to assess the reaction of different cultivars of bean against
Bean common mosaic virus through sap inoculation. Results revealed that Blue lake
cultivar had the lowest severity of Bean common mosaic virus, while Black valentine
cultivar had the highest severity of Bean common mosaic virus. On incidence, the Black
valentine cultivar had the lowest incidence, while the Maroon cultivar had the highest
incidence of Bean common mosaic virus.

Conclusion
Among the different cultivars of bean, it was found that Blue lake cultivar had some
sort of tolerance or resistance against Bean common mosaic virus. Black valentine cultivar
was susceptible to Bean common mosaic virus. Black valentine cultivar had the lowest
incidence and at the same time had the lowest severity of Bean common mosaic virus.

Recommendation

Further studies could include yield datum in order to find out which variety can
gain more profit to farmers.




Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012

LITERATURE CITED

BEAVER, J. S., PORCH CLAY, T. G., ZAPATA, M. 2010.Registration of ‘Badillo’ Light
Red Kidney Bean. Journal of Plant Registrations 4:1-4.

BEVORIC M. D., A . MITCHELL., N. KRIEGER and R. BURUCHARA. Backgroud
information on common beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris L) in biotecnology, breeding
and seed systems.

DAVID, S., R. KIRKBY and S. KASOZI, (2000). Assessing the impact of bush bean
varieties on poverty reduction in Sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from Ugan,
network on bean research in Africa

EDINGTON, B. R. and V. H. WHITLOCK. 2008. Identification of an isolate of bean
common mosaic virus from the Transvaal and Natal. Annals of Applied Biology,
Volume 113 Issue 3, Pages 645 – 648.

KELLY, J. D., L. AFANOR and S. D. HALEY 1995.Pyramidinggenes for resistance to
bean common mosaic virus. EuphyticaJournal,Springer Netherlands, Volume 82,
Number 3, 207-212 pp.
MORALES, F. J. and L. BOS 1988. Bean common mosaic virus.AAB Descriptions of
Plant Viruses No. 337.Association of Applied Biologists, Wellesbourne.
PIERC, C. And M. HUNGERFORD. 1929. Phythophathology. 19:605. Retrieve July 2010,
from http://www.dpwweb.net/dpv/showdpv.php?=73.
QUARTZ. D., 1962. NachrBl. Dt. PfLSchutzdient. Stuttg. 14:49. Retrieved July 2010 from
http://www.dpwweb.net/dpv/showndpv.php?=73.
SHARMA, P.N., ANJU PATHANIA., RENU KAPIL., PRACHI SHARMA NOIDA.,
SHARMA, O.P., MADHU PATIALand VIKAS KAPOOR. 2008. Resistance to
bean common mosaic potyvirus strains and its inheritance in some Indian land races
of common bean. Euphytica Journal, Springer Netherlands, Volume 164, Number
1, 173-180 pp.
WALKEY, D. G. A. and N. L. INNES.. 1979. Resistance to bean common mosaic virus
in dwarf beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Cambridge University Press, the Journal of
Agricultural Science, 92:101-108.
ZAUMEYER W. J., and R. W GOTH., 1963. Occurrence of Phyllosticta leaf spot in
beans. Plant Disease. Rep. 47:1079.


Bean Common Mosaic Virus Infection on Different Cultivars of Bean |
MATIAS, CRISTY TINGCAWA. APRIL 2012