Influence of sowing date and irrigation on the growth and yield of pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in a sub-humid temperate environment

Abstract

SUMMARYThe growth and yield of pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Othello in response to a total of six sowing dates (from October to December) and irrigation was examined over two seasons in Canterbury, New Zealand. In 1994\95, two irrigation treatments (nil and full) were combined with two sowing dates (27 October and 24 November). In 1995\96, Othello was examined under two irrigation treatments (nil and full) and four sowing dates (1 November, 15 November, 29 November and 13 December). The total rainfall for the two seasons was 50 % and 60 % of the long-term average, respectively. The mean temperatures for the seasons were similar to the long-term average. Both irrigation and sowing date had a marked effect on growth and seed yield. Averaged over both seasons, seed yield for fully irrigated crops was 337 g\m#, c. 50 % higher than the yield of unirrigated crops. The irrigated crops yielded more than the unirrigated crops because they attained greater canopy closure, intercepting 84-95 % of incident radiation. They also had on the average 47 % higher leaf area duration (LAD), 72 % higher maximum leaf area index (LAI) and greater utilization coefficient. The mid-to late November-sown crops yielded more than the late October to early November and December-sown crops because the leaf area of the former increased most rapidly, achieved a higher maximum LAI and LAD and consequently intercepted more photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). They also had faster pod growth rates and 26 % of stored assimilates contributed to pod growth compared with 13 % in late October to early November and 5 % in December-sown crops. The results showed that pinto beans can grow and yield well in Canterbury, and that a yield advantage could be obtained when sown in mid-to late November and with irrigation.

Effects of Deficit Irrigation and Salinity Stress on Common Bean (Phaseolus Vulgaris L.) and Mungbean (Vigna Radiata (L.) Wilczek) Grown in a Controlled Environment

“…2007). The decrease in yield reported for common bean in this study is consistent with other field observations (Nielsen and Nelson 1998, Dapaah et al. 2000, Boutraa and Sanders 2001), but the decrease in yield reported here in mungbean is not consistent with our previous findings (Bourgault et al.…”

“…Mungbean yields, however, showed the highest yields at the moderate stress level of RDI in 2003 and the severe stress level of RDI in 2004 (Bourgault et al 2007). The decrease in yield reported for common bean in this study is consistent with other field observations (Nielsen and Nelson 1998, Dapaah et al 2000, Boutraa and Sanders 2001, but the decrease in yield reported here in mungbean is not consistent with our previous findings (Bourgault et al 2007) or with findings from other field studies (Angus et al 1983, Muchow 1985a. We are relatively confident, from the conditions in which they have been selected, that the lines tested should exhibit higher drought tolerance than most cultivars of their species.…”

Performance of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajanL. Millsp.) at different sowing dates in the mid-hills of Indian Himalaya

“…Thus, time of sowing plays an important role but there is no such information available on pigeon pea for this region, because pigeon pea is less popular in the hilly region. The importance of the sowing date on crop performance is a well established fact (Redden et al 1997;Dapaah et al 2000;Begum et al 2003). Therefore, the present investigation was carried out.…”

Yield, yield components and plant architecture in the F3 generation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) derived from a cross between the determinate cultivar ‘Prelude’ and an indeterminate landrace

“…Although Coyne (1965) was not successful with selection for yield or for yield components in common bean, Sarafi (1978) showed that selection was effective in increasing the number of pods/plant with no simultaneous change in the levels of the other yield components and Coyne (1968) recommended this trait for selection for yields. The 'components of yield' approach has been used widely to explain variations in the yield of grain legumes such as peas (Pisum sativum L.) (Nichols et al 1985), field bean (Vicia faba L.) (Husain et al 1988) and Phaseolus vulgaris (Dapaah et al 2000).…”