Caffeinated and Cocoa Based Beverages 2019
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-815864-7.00003-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic and Phenotypic Diversity of Robusta Coffee (Coffea canephora L.)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The disparity of results between these studies and our study might be mostly due to the origin of the tested population. While these studies used populations from accessions conserved in ex-situ collections (Tshilenge et al 2009), cultivated landraces and gene bank accessions (Ngugi and Aluka 2019), and cultivated and wild Robusta coffee (Ng'homaa et al 2017), our study used population developed from selection. Because of their high diversity, some of the accessions used by these authors could be good candidates for improving Robusta coffee in Lampung.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The disparity of results between these studies and our study might be mostly due to the origin of the tested population. While these studies used populations from accessions conserved in ex-situ collections (Tshilenge et al 2009), cultivated landraces and gene bank accessions (Ngugi and Aluka 2019), and cultivated and wild Robusta coffee (Ng'homaa et al 2017), our study used population developed from selection. Because of their high diversity, some of the accessions used by these authors could be good candidates for improving Robusta coffee in Lampung.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Genetic diversity within Robusta coffee cultivated in Lampung is needed for developing a breeding strategy to produce better clones. Genetic diversity of plant genotypes could be studied on the basis of morphological (Ngugi et al 2019), biochemical (Mahmoud and Abd EL-Fatah 2020), and molecular (Motta et al 2014;Omingo et al 2017;Sousa et al 2017) markers. One of the drawbacks of using morphological and biochemical markers is that they are influenced by the environment, while molecular markers are not influenced by the environment (Bekele and Bekele 2014;Nadeem et al 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several methods are used to evaluate genetic diversity, including morphologic, physicochemical, and molecular markers. Morphological markers are primordial to selection and have been substantially used to explain diversity among coffee accesses (AKPERTEY et al, 2019;NGUGI & ALUKA, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uganda has been reported to have substantial C . canephora diversity (Kiwuka, 2020 ; Kiwuka et al, 2021 ; Musoli et al, 2009 ; Ngugi & Aluka, 2019 ) which could be explored to identify functional diversity in regard to drought stress. But to our knowledge, intraspecific comparisons of drought‐related traits in C .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uganda has been reported to have substantial C. canephora diversity (Kiwuka, 2020;Kiwuka et al, 2021;Musoli et al, 2009;Ngugi & Aluka, 2019) which could be explored to identify functional diversity in regard to drought stress. But to our knowledge, intraspecific comparisons of drought-related traits in C. canephora have been limited to cultivated material (DaMatta et al, 2003;Dias et al, 2007;King'oro, 2014;Menezes-Silva et al, 2015;Pinheiro & Var, 2004;Silva et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%