Assessment of agro-morphological traits diversity in cowpea landraces originated from arid and warm regions of Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• Behnam Bakhshi ¹
• Masoumeh Pouresmaeil ²
• Mohammad Keshtgar Khajedad ¹

¹ Horticulture Crops Research Department, Sistan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Zabol, Iran

² Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran

10.22067/ijpr.v12i2.87704

Abstract

Introduction
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) is a neglected crop with a wide diversity of its landraces in Iran, which acclimated to different climates. Cowpea is considered as one of the most tolerant food legumes under heat and drought stress. Although cowpea is distributed in a wide range of arid and warm climate of Iran, no extensive study has been done to determine the diversity of the landrace originated from these regions. Increasing yield, early maturity for grain production, long vegetative period for fodder yield, nutrient in leaf and grains, cooking quality, and germination rate are some crucial traits in cowpea breeding programs. Agro-morphological characterization of the existence germplasm would help to identification of the valuable genetic resources which could be entered into cowpea breeding programs to overcome challenges facing this crop production.
 
Materials and Methods
Fifty landraces of cowpea originated from the arid and warm climate of IRAN along with Sistan local cowpea landrace (Mak) were evaluated for the diversity of 39 quantitative and qualitative agro-morphological traits. IBPGR descriptor was used to the characterization of traits; including terminal leaflet shape, leaf area, plant height, number of main branches, hypocotyl length, growth habit, number of nodes on the main stem, internode length, plant vigor, number of fixation nodules in root, fresh weight, dry weight, days to flower initiation, days to flowering (50%), days to flower termination, days to first mature pods, days to maturity, days to harvest, flower color, raceme position, pod color, seed crowding, pod wall thickness, plant hairiness, attachment of testa, pod length, number of locules per pod, 100-seed weight, number of pods per peduncle, number of pods per plant, yield, seed length, seed width, pod curvature, eye pattern, testa texture, canopy temperature, leaf chlorophyll concentration, and heat stress effects %. This experiment was done at the Zahak agricultural station of Sistan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center. The experiments were performed observationally using furrow planting. Each landrace was sown in a five-meter row. 100 and 10 cm were considered for between and within row spaces of plants, respectively. Irrigation was carried out based on the needs of the plant and considering the conventional method of cowpea irrigating in the Sistan region, almost every two weeks. Statistical methods, including correlation, factor analysis, canonical correlation, path analysis, and cluster analysis, were used to identify the diversity and relationship among traits.
 
Results and Discussion
Yield components included 100-seed weight and number of pods per plant were the most diverse traits in the current study. Based on the results, studied landraces could be potentially categorized in two grain and forage types. N7222 (Sarmoshk local landrace) and Mak (Zabol local landrace) showed the highest grain yield among evaluated landraces. TN7241 (another Zabol local landrace) and TN7274 (Kahnouj local landrace) were detected as landrace with the highest potential for forage production. It was also identified that two other Kahnouj local landraces, including TN7292 and TN7291, are the earliest maturity landraces among evaluated landraces. Correlation analysis showed a significant positive relationship between yield and number of N₂ fixation nodules in the root. A significant positive correlation was also identified between pod length with a dry weight of the plant, the number of locules per pod, and 100-seed weight. Furthermore, it was revealed that yield was directly affected by pod length using path analysis. Path analysis distinct phenological traits from quantitative traits related to yield. Canonical correlation showed a negative correlation between days to flowering with grain yield, and it was shown that dwarf bushes with high yield component and 100-seed weight matured lately.
 
Conclusion
Notable diversity for cowpea landraces was observed in the current study. The results of this research divided the accession to two grain and forage types. It was identified that high biomass yielded plants were not comfortable for grain production while they product suitable forage production. According to the results, two landraces were the best ones in grain production that were confirmed by cluster analysis. Pod length and the number of locules per pod were detected as the main two traits related to yield. The observed diversity in yield components could be applied further in the cowpea breeding programs.

Keywords

• Arid and warm climate
• Cowpea
• Genetic diversity
• Vigna unguiculata

Main Subjects

• Ecophysiology
• Agronomy

---

References

1. Addinsoft, S. 2010. XLSTAT Software, version 9.0. Addinsoft, Paris, France.
2. Ajayi, A., Adekola, M., Taiwo, B., and Azuh, V. 2014. Character expression and differences in yield potential of ten genotypes of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp). International Journal of Plant Research 4(3): 63-71.
3. Ali, Z., Yao, K., Odeny, D., Kyalo, M., Skilton, R., and Eltahir, I. 2015. Assessing the genetic diversity of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] accessions from Sudan using simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers. African Journal of Plant Science 9(7): 293-304.
4. Aremu, C., Adebayo, M., Ariyo, O., and Adewale, B. 2007. Classification of genetic diversity and choice of parents for hybridization in cowpea Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp for humid savanna ecology. African Journal of Biotechnology 6(20): 2333-2339.
5. Aryeetey, A., and Laing, E. 1973. Inheritance of yield components and their correlation with yield in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.). Euphytica 22(2): 386-392.
6. Asare, A.T., Gowda, B.S., Galyuon, I.K., Aboagye, L.L., Takrama, J.F., and Timko, M.P. 2010. Assessment of the genetic diversity in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp.) germplasm from Ghana using simple sequence repeat markers. Plant Genetic Resources 8(2): 142-150.
7. Ba, F.S., Pasquet, R.S., and Gepts, P. 2004. Genetic diversity in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] as revealed by RAPD markers. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 51(5): 539-550.
8. Benesty, J., Chen, J., Huang, Y., and Cohen, I. 2009. Pearson correlation coefficient. In: Noise Reduction in Speech Processing (pp. 1-4). Springer.
9. Blashfield, R.K. 1980. The growth of cluster analysis: Tryon, Ward, and Johnson. Multivariate Behavioral Research 15(4): 439-458.
10. Bozokalfa, M.K., Kaygisiz, A.T., and Eşiyok, D. 2017. Genetic diversity of farmer-preferred cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp) landraces in Turkey and evaluation of their relationships based on agromorphological traits. Genetika 49(3): 935-957.
11. Coulibaly, S., Pasquet, R., Papa, R., and Gepts, P. 2002. AFLP analysis of the phenetic organization and genetic diversity of Vigna unguiculata Walp. reveals extensive gene flow between wild and domesticated types. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104(2-3): 358-366.
12. Egbadzor, K., Danquah, E., Ofori, K., Yeboah, M., and Offei, S. 2014. Diversity in 118 cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) accessions assessed with 16 morphological traits. International Journal of Plant Breeding and Genetics 8(1): 13-24.
13. Ehlers, J., and Hall, A. 1997. Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata walp.). Field Crops Research 53(1-3): 187-204.
14. Fatokun, C.A., Tarawali, A., Singh, B.B., Kormawa, P.M., and Tamo, M. 2002. Challenges and opportunities for enhancing sustainable cowpea production. Proceedings of the World Cowpea Conference III held at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria, 48 September 2000.
15. Gepts, P. 2002. A comparison between crop domestication, classical plant breeding, and genetic engineering. Crop Science 42(6): 1780-1790.
16. Hall, A., and Patel, P. 1985. Breeding for resistance to drought and heat. Cowpea Research, Production and U Wiley, New York, 137-151.
17. Hosseinian, S., and Hoseiyni, N. 2014. Determination of drought tolerant genotypes in cowpea based on drought tolerance indices. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 45(1): 123-138. (In Persian with English Summary).
18. Hosseinian, S., and Hoseiyni, H.N. 2015. Evaluation of irrigation cut off effect at flowering stage on yield and yield components of cowpea genotypes. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(2): 99-108. (In Persian with English Summary).
19. International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR). 1982. Descriptors for C Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at Web site https://www.bioversityinternational.org/
20. Klem, L. 1995. Path analysis. American Psychological Association.
21. Krichen, L., Audergon, J., and Trifi‐Farah, N. 2012. Relative efficiency of morphological characters and molecular markers in the establishment of an apricot core collection. Hereditas 149(5): 163-172.
22. Lazaridi, E., Ntatsi, G., Savvas, D., and Bebeli, P. 2017. Diversity in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) local populations from Greece. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 64(7): 1529-1551.
23. Mafakheri, K., Bihamta, M., and Abbasi, A. 2015. Screening for drought stress tolerance in cowpea genotypes (Vigna unguiculata). Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(2): 123-138. (In Persian with English Summary).
24. Mafakheri, K., Bihamta, M.R., and Abbasi, A.R. 2017. Assessment of genetic diversity in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata ) germplasm using morphological and molecular characterisation. Cogent Food and Agriculture. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2017.1327092
25. Manggoel, W., Uguru, M., Ndam, O., and Dasbak, M. 2012. Genetic variability, correlation and path coefficient analysis of some yield components of ten cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] accessions. Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science 4(5): 80-86.
26. Martins, C.M., Lawlor, D.W., Quilambo, O.A., and Kunert, K.J. 2014. Evaluation of four Mozambican cowpea landraces for drought tolerance. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 31(2): 87-91.
27. Menssen, M., Linde, M., Omondi, E.O., Abukutsa-Onyango, M., Dinssa, F.F., and Winkelmann, T. 2017. Genetic and morphological diversity of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) entries from East Africa. Scientia Horticulturae 226: 268-276.
28. Myers, L., and Sirois, M.J. 2004. Spearman correlation coefficients, differences between. Encyclopedia of Statistical S https://doi.org/10.1002/0471667196.ess5050.pub2
29. Olukolu, B.A., Mayes, S., Stadler, F., Ng, N.Q., Fawole, I., Dominique, D., and Kole, C. 2012. Genetic diversity in Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea (L. ) as revealed by phenotypic descriptors and DArT marker analysis. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 59(3): 347-358.
30. Omoigui, L., Ishiyaku, M., Kamara, A., Alabi, S., and Mohammed, S. 2006. Genetic variability and heritability studies of some reproductive traits in cowpea (Vigna unguiculate (L.) Walp.). African Journal of Biotechnology 5(13): 1191-1195.
31. Ortiz-Burgos, S. 2016. Shannon-weaver diversity index. In: Encyclopedia of Estuaries (pp. 572-573): Springer Netherlands.
32. Othman, S., Singh, B., and Mukhtar, F. 2006. Studies on the inheritance pattern of joints, pod and flower pigmentation in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L) walp.]. African Journal of Biotechnology 5(23): 2371-2376.
33. Padulosi, S., and Ng, N. 1997. Origin, taxonomy, and morphology of Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. Advances in Cowpea Research. Ibadan, Nigeria: IITA, p. 1-12.
34. Peksen, E., and Artik, C. 2004. Comparison of some cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp) genotypes from Turkey for seed yield and yield related characters. Journal of Agronomy 3(2): 137-140.
35. Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., and Ullman, J.B. 2007. Using Multivariate Statistics (Vol. 5), Pearson Boston, MA.
36. Tan, H., Tie, M., Luo, Q., Zhu, Y., Lai, J., and Li, H. 2012. A review of molecular makers applied in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp.) breeding. Journal of Life Sciences 6(11): 1190-1199.
37. Tanhuanpää, P., and Manninen, O. 2012. High SSR diversity but little differentiation between accessions of Nordic timothy (Phleum pratense). Hereditas 149(4): 114-127.
38. Thompson, B. 2005. Canonical correlation analysis. Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science 1: 192-196.
39. Thurstone, L.L. 1931. Multiple factor analysis. Psychological Review 38(5): 406.
40. Timko, M.P., and Singh, B. 2008. Cowpea, a multifunctional legume. In: Genomics of Tropical Crop Plants (p. 227-258): Springer.
41. Verma, J. 2012. Data Analysis in Management with SPSS Software: Springer Science and Business Media.
42. Wilkes, G. 1983. Current Status of Crop Plant Germplasm: CAC Critical Review. Plant Science 127: 137-181.
43. Xiong, H., Shi, A., Mou, B., Qin, J., Motes, D., Lu, W., and Wu, D. 2016. Genetic diversity and population structure of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Walp). PLoS One 11(8): e0160941.