OPEN ACCESS Freely available online

Review Article

Emerging and Reemerging Diseases of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris

L.) in Major Production Areas: In the Case of Ethiopia
Endriyas Gabrekiristos*, Mulatwa Wondimu
Department of Agriculture, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Melkassa Agricultural Research Center P.O. BOX: 436, Adama,
Ethiopia

ABSTRACT
Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is one of the important cash crops to Ethiopian smallholder farmers and an
important agricultural commodity which contribute to export earnings. A total of twenty five common bean diseases
were recorded in Ethiopia and this high value crop is constrained by Anthracnose, Rust, Web blight, Angular leaf
spot, Leaf blight, Floury leaf spot, Rhizoctonia solani, Fusarium wilt, Sclerotium rolffsii, Common bacterial blight, Halo
blight, Common bean mosaic virus and Root rot nematode. Among these diseases the major one is Anthracnose,
Rust, common bacterial blight and Halo blight causing 100%, 85%, 62% and 45% yield loss respectively. However
the newly emerging and the status of existing diseases were frequently changing based on climate variability.
Except rust, anthracnose, halo blight and common bacterial blight is seed borne and easily spread long distance by
seed. Use of seed from unknown source and importing common bean seed without inspection has an impact on
countries economy. Common bean diseases can be managed by cultural, chemical and host resistance. Reducing
initial inoculum source by field sanitation, burning of crop residues, crop rotation and planting healthy seed is
among common bean diseases management. Disease free seed and resistant/tolerant planting materials is a source
of common bean disease management options and reduce the distribution of seed borne diseases to new areas. Since
major common bean diseases are seed borne, the seed import should have to pass through quarantine system of the
country. Studies on epidemiological element should have to be conducted to identify the biology of common bean
diseases to devise management options. Any planting materials should pass through quarantine system to the county
before entering to production system. The research should intensively concentrate on germplasm screening to obtain
multiple disease resistant varieties to replace susceptible common bean variety. Country wide survey is important
for early detection of newly emerging diseases. In this review attempt has been made to summarize relevant scientific
studies on this economically important crop, Common bean diseases such as Anthracnose, Common bacterial
blight, Rust, Halo blight and associated factors in Ethiopia as well as its different disease management options,
challenges and future prospects.
Keywords: Common bean; Ecology; Epidemiology; Management

INTRODUCTION powder form.

Common bean is legume crop which is consumed worldwide for its In Ethiopia, common bean is grown under diverse climatic
edible seeds and pods. It is the most important source of proteins conditions from 1200 masl–2400 masl. It is grown primarily by
for nearly five hundred million people in Africa, Latin America small-scale farmers who have limited resources and usually produce
and the Caribbean particularly for low income earning households. the crop under adverse conditions such as low input use, marginal
Common bean is high source of different nutrition. This crop is lands, and intercropping with competitive crops like sorghum,
one of the most important cash crops to smallholder farmers in maize and some other perennial tree crops like coffee. The Rift
many lowlands and mid land areas of Ethiopia. It is used as food in valley area accounts for more than half of the country’s common
different form, i.e., the green unripe pods are cooked as vegetable bean production, mainly the white pea bean type that is grown for
and the ripe seeds cooked for “nifro” or boiled with mixed with export. However, productivity of common bean under the optimal
sorghum or maize and the powder is consumed as “woti” using management conditions, can reach to 2.5 ton to 3.0 ton per

Correspondence to: Endriyas Gabrekiristos, Department of Agriculture, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Melkassa Agricultural Research
Center P.O. BOX: 436, Adama, Ethiopia, Email:[email protected]
Received: 27-May-2022, Manuscript No. JPPM-22-16472; Editor assigned: 30-May-2022, PreQC No. JPPM-22-16472 (PQ); Reviewed: 13-Jun-2022, QC
No. JPPM-22-16472; Revised: 20-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. JPPM-22-16472 (R); Published: 28-Jun-2022, DOI:10.35248/2157-7471.22.13.619.
Citation: Gabrekiristos E, Wondimu M (2022) Emerging and Reemerging Diseases of Common Bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in major production areas:
In the case of Ethiopia. J Plant Pathol Microbiol. 13:619.
Copyright: © 2022 Gabrekiristos E, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 1

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

hectare. The national average yield of common beans in Ethiopia states with varying intensity. Production is concentrated in two
is 1.6 ton ha-1, which is far below the corresponding yield recorded regions: Oromia and the Southern National Nationality Peoples
at research sites (2.5-3 tones ha-1) using improved varieties. The Region (SNNPR), which account for about 85 percent of the total
average production in 2019 was 1.85 t/ha which is very far below national production. The remaining 25 percent comes from Afar,
the potential yield of the crop (Figure 1) [1]. Amhara, Tigray, Somali, Gambella and Benishangul-Gumuz.
About 80-90 percent of the area allocated to common bean in
LITERATURE REVIEW SNNPR is designated for red varieties while the white varieties
occupy10 percent-20 percent of the area [4].
Despite the importance of common bean in Ethiopia, total crop
failure due to diseases has been common and sometimes farmers Even though this crop has economic significance and wide area
are forced to abandon their production due to excessive disease coverage, the national annual yield is low, ranging from 0.615
pressure in the field. The diseases that are threatening common tons/ha-1.487 tons/ha between the years 2004 and 2010, but the
bean production and productivity in Ethiopia is emerging and productivity is better increased and the average yield in 2019 was
reemerging due to climatic change happening frequently. Fungal 1.85 tons/ha (Figure 3). According to Atnaf, the current average
disease such as Anthracnose, Rust, Web blight, Angular leaf common bean yield is 12 quintals per hectare, but research
spot, Leaf blight, Floury leaf spot, Rhizoctonia spp, Fusarium wilt demonstrated 34 quintals per hectare, which is triple to national
and Sclerotium spp; Bacterial disease such as Common bacterial average yield [5].
blight, Halo blight; Common bean mosaic virus and Root rot
nematode are among reported diseases on common bean. Among Economic significances of common bean disease in
these in Ethiopia; Anthracnose, Rust, Common bacterial blight, Ethiopia
Halo blight and Angular leaf spot are more important and widely
The production of this crop is not stable as needed due to biotic
distributed in the country, while the remaining are also important
and abiotic factor. In 2014 at Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia, total
in some areas and much more restricted in their distribution.
loss occurs due to ellino. In this year drought affects the entire
Therefore, this paper presents the emerging and reemerging disease
crop produced in this area. Beside ellino biotic factor is the
of common bean in major production areas, economic importance
limiting factor in production of common bean in Ethiopia. In
and management options in Ethiopia [2].
Ethiopia several bean diseases are reported with different economic
Economic significances of common bean in Ethiopia importance. A total of 25 diseases were recorded and characterized
as a causal agent of common bean in the country [6].
Common bean is grown for the export market and as food legume
The status of Anthracnose, Rust, Leaf spots, Mosaic and Bacterial
in parts of country. It is a major crop produced as staple food and
blight listed as a major during 1967 in Ethiopia (Table 2). The
for export market in Ethiopia. Now a day one can produce and sale
remaining are either of intermediate or minor importance. In
to different markets in the county. Common bean is among legume
study conducted by Habtu indicate that, common bacterial blight
which contribute to smallholder crop production, nutrition as a
was most severe, but rust and anthracnose were also observed.
cost-effective source of protein and income as a high-value export
crop. Ethiopian white canning beans are exported to Europe, The major diseases identified on haricot bean in this country
Africa, the Middle East, South Asia and Far East (Figure 2) [3]. include Bean rust, Bacterial blights, Anthracnose, viruses, Phoma
blight and Root rots. Of these, Bacterial blights, Phoma blights,
Due to high content of nitrogen, Common bean is used as
Anthracnose and viruses are seed-borne. Anthracnose, Rust, Leaf
improving soil fertility through biological nitrogen fixation,
spots, Mosaic and Bacterial blight listed as a major during 1967
livestock feed, soil erosion control, source of fuel and a range of
in Ethiopia; however during 1997-2002, the intermediate disease
other benefits. Common bean is mainly cultivated in the East
causing pathogens become emerge and become major disease
Shewa, South Shewa, Sidamo, Keffa, Gamo Gofa, Wollega, Gojjem
causing pathogens (Table 3). This indicate that, the frequent climate
and Hararghe areas (Table 1).
change also favor and disfavor the variability and occurrence of
Common bean in Ethiopia is produced in almost all the regional plant disease (Figure 4) [7].

Figure 1: The status of common bean in area coverage and total production trend from 2015 to 2019 in Ethiopia.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 2

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

Figure 2: Common bean production and distribution in Ethiopia, 2007. Note: ( ) 0or Nodatya, ( ) 0-2500 Ha, ( ) 2500-5000, ( ) 5000-
10000. ( ) 10000-25000.

Table 1: Agro-ecological zonation of major common bean production areas.

Zone Region Altitude(Masl) Rain fall(mm) Season

East Shewa 1500-1700 450-950 Bimodal
Central Rift Valley
South Shewa 1500-1700 450-950 Bimodal
Eastern Hararghe highland 1700-2200 950-1500 Unimodal
Sidamo 1500-1900 950-1500 Bimodal
Southern
Gamo Gofa 1500-1900 950-1500 Bimodal
Keffa 1500-1700 950-1500 Unimodal
Wollega 1500-1700 950-1500 Unimodal
Western
Ilubabor 1500-1700 950-1500 Unimodal
Gojjem 1500-1700 950-1500 Unimodal

Figure 3: Picture taken from West Arsi Zone (Shalla) and yield per hectare in quintals (2015-2019).
Note: ( ) Yield Qthe

Table 2: Common bean diseases status in Ethiopia.

Common name Causal agent Status

Leaf Spot Ascochyta phaseolorum Sacc. Minor
Angular Leaf Spot Isariopsie sriseola Sacc. Major
Leaf Spot Ceraoapora zurunaris Ell.Sev Minor
Anthracnose Colletotriohum lindermthiamm Major
Stem Anthracnose C. trunatamm (Schw.) Minor
Leaf Spot Phyllosticta phaseolina (Sacc.) Minor
Powdery Leaf Spot Mycospaerella phaseoli Intermediate
Root-Rot Saterotiwn rofsii Sacc. It Intermediate
Rust Uromyces phaseoli Major
Common Bacterial Blight Xanthompnas campastria pv phaleoli Intermediate

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 3

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

Halo Blight P. syringae pv. Phaseolicola Intermediate

Leave/Leaf Spot Ceroosporidium spp. Minor
Leaf Spots Mycosphaerella pinodea Minor
Leaf Spots Periconia byssoides Pers. ex. Merta. Minor
Leaf Spots Phoma exigua Desm. Major
Leaf Spots P. phoselina Pass. Major
Pot Spots P. sorghina (Sacc.) Unknown
Mosaic Virus/BCMV Major
Root Rot Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib) Minor
Wilt Fusarium solani (Mart.) Intermediate
Ashy Stem Blight Macrophomina phaseoti(maub1.) Minor
Leaf Spot Ascochyta sojicola Abaram off. Minor
Charcoal Rot Macrophomina phaseoli Minor
Leaf Spot Mycosphaerella creuenta (Sacc.) Minor
Bacterial Blight P. syringae pv glycinea Major

Table 3: List of pathogens causing diseases of common bean in Ethiopia, 1997-2002.

Causal agent Common name Distribution Status

Colletotrichum lindemuthianum Anthracnose Wide Major
Uromyces appendiculatus Rust Wide Major
X. campestris Pv. Phaseoli Common bacterial blight Wide Major
Rhizoctonia solani Web blight Limited Major
Phaeoisariopsis griseola Angular leaf spot Limited Major
Phoma exigua var. diversispora Leaf blight Limited Intermediate
P. syringae pv. Phaseolicola Halo blight Limited Intermediate
Mycovellosiella phaseoli Floury leaf spot Limited Intermediate
Bean common mosaic poty virus Bean common mosaic virus Limited Intermediate
R. solani, FOC, Sclerotium rolffsii Root rots and wilts Unknown Minor

Figure 4: Picture showing symptom of common bacterial blight (from Boset, 2016).

The major disease identified on haricot bean during 1967 was Bean phaseoli is among the main constraints to common bean production.
rust, Anthracnose, viruses, Bacterial blight and Leaf spot. Rust, During the first report in 1967 the status of the pathogen is in
Anthracnose and Leaf spot diseases are among major common categorized as intermediate. However starting from 1997 Common
bean diseases in Ethiopia since 1967. However, Common bacterial bacterial blight re-emerge and categorized as major disease causing
blight and Web blight is reemerged common bean disease in 1997- agent. Since then this pathogen is major constraint in all common
2002. Halo blight and Angular leaf spot is among major common bean producing areas of Ethiopia. Efforts are made on the studies
bean a disease which requires management options. on disease variability, biology and management options since 1967
[8].
Economic importance of common bacterial blight
Disease symptoms first appear on leaves as small, water-soaked
Common bacterial blight is first reported in 1893, and the causal spots, light green areas, or both (Figure 5). As these spots enlarge,
agent was named Bacillus phaseoli by Smith in 1897. After seventy the tissue in the center dies and turns brown. Common Bacterial
four years, in Ethiopia the pathogen, Xanthomonas campestris pv. Blight (CBB) attacks leaves, stems, pods and seeds.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 4

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

Figure 5: Figure showing severity of anthracnose on common bean, Picture taken by Endriyas G., 2021.

The causal agents of this pathogen are named and after several and even some seeds without the disease symptoms were found to
studies the species name are changed from X. campestris to X. have infection from 10% to 12%. This suggests that visual assessment
axonopodis. Research finding indicates that, Xanthomonas axonopodis or direct inspection alone is not good enough to conclude on the
pv. phaseoli (Xap) and X. axonopodis pv. phaseoli var. fuscans (Xapf), is magnitude of seed infection occurring in a particular seed lot. It
the most destructive bacterial disease of bean causing up to 62% survives in the soil, infected plant debris and seeds [12].
yield losses. Yield reduction of up to 35% recorded by common
A number of factors influence temporal spread of the disease
bacterial blight in susceptible varieties of beans. In eastern
including cropping systems. Fininsa and Yuen reported that
Hararghe, in the 1999 and 2000 cropping seasons, an actual yield
CBB develops more rapidly in sole stand of common bean crops
loss of 21% was reported due to Common bacterial blight.
than those intercropped with maize. According to the authors,
Recent survey conducted by MARC in 2014 showed that, from intercropping delays CBB epidemic onset; reduces disease progress
assessed common bean growing districts Common bacterial blight rate and area under the disease progress curve, as well as final
average severity recorded was 40 percent. This indicates that, disease incidence and severity [13].
Common bacterial blight is important pathogen in Ethiopia [9].
During extended period of warm and humid weather, the disease
Diversity of common bacterial blight can be highly destructive and causes losses in both yield and seed
quality of bean in many production areas of Ethiopia. Minimum
CBB pathogen belongs to the genus Xanthomonas, a Gram-negative temperatures for growth range is between 5°C to 9°C and maximum
group of γ-proteobacteria. During the time when the identification temperatures range from 30°C to 39°C. The pathogen is a principal
of Xanthomonas as a causal agent of CBB in 1897, the taxonomy of constraint in mid-altitude production areas and is favored by warm
infecting strains has been debated, owing to their changing genetic temperatures and high relative humidity. For disease epidemics,
diversity even in a common bean host. Until 1995, fuscous and primary inoculum source plays a vital role in determining the level
non-fuscous strains were grouped in a single taxon, X. campestris pv. of CBB development and its effect on yield as well as seed quality.
phaseoli. Following taxonomical revision of the genus Xanthomonas, The Study conducted in eastern Ethiopia revealed that primary
pathovar phaseoli was transferred to X. axonopodis, with fuscous inoculum from infested debris is relatively more damaging than
strains forming a variant within this pathovar. Previously in other inoculum sources, causing early epidemic development and
Ethiopia the causal agent are named as Xanthomonas campestris pv. yield reduction. CBB is major disease in mid altitude areas of the
phaseoli. However, now a day there is a change of name and revision country which have similar result with recent survey conducted in
on the characteristic features of the pathogen [10]. 2014 by Melkassa Plant Pathology team. This pathogen is frequently
seen than other diseases in the Central Rift Valley areas of Ethiopia
This Characteristic features by classical disease diagnosis should
[14].
have to be confirmed in Ethiopia. During the 2003 cropping
season a study by Selamawit showed that two variants/strains, Management of common bacterial blight
including the fuscan type exist in the Central Rift Valley areas of
Ethiopia. Similarly, the occurrence of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. Cultural practice: Common bacterial blight management options
phaseoli and Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli var. fuscan strains include components that reduce initial inoculum source such as
on common bean leaves were investigated from isolates in Eastern field sanitation, crop rotation whenever feasible, planting healthy
Amhara region of Ethiopia [11]. seed, early incorporation of bean debris into soil, burning of crop
residues and effective seed treatment. The pathogen is seed borne
Ecology and epidemiology and planting the seed from certified and known seed source is best
option. Rain splash is other spread method of CBB and keeping
Seed-borne nature of CBB in common bean has been established,
the common bean production field free of weed to reduce field

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 5

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

suffocation and free of Common bacterial blight. Reports on the seed due to anthracnose in 2002 cropping season [21].
efficacy of varietal mixture in the control of CBB in common beans
Disease symptoms on bean leaves are evident as dark, linear, and
are available from eastern and western Hararghe areas, Ethiopia
black to brick-red lesions found on the lower surface of the leaf and
[15]. For instance, varietal mixtures with the resistant variety,
mainly seen at primary and trifoliate leaf stage along the veins. The
Gofta (G-2816), consistently reduce CBB incidence, severity, area
most characteristic symptom of the disease is the black-red sunken
under disease progress curve. Therefore, cultivar mixtures can be
cankers or spots that develop on infected pods (Figure 5). As these
used as a component of integrated disease management scheme
spots become older, the edges develop a black ring with a red outer
for food type’s common bean. Bean-maize intercropping could
border and show pink ooze in the center, which contains the spores
also be component of CBB integrated disease management. The
of the fungus [22-25].
type of cropping system and crop growth stage influence the CBB
severity and yield loss. Research conducted by Habtu In broadcast Anthracnose is among the destructive disease of common beans
and mixed intercropping, for example, for each increase in CBB globally and in Kenya. The fungus is highly viable with more
severity, about 5.2 and 9.1 kg ha-1 seed yield loss, respectively, than 100 pathogenic variants and races reported in the scientific
occurred at physiological maturity [16]. literature. Losses may be up to 100% under climatic and soil
conditions favorable to the disease [26-30]. The fungus C.
Host resistance: Host pathogen interaction and breeding for disease
lindemuthianum can attack all aerial plant parts and may cause yield
resistance is the effective component in plant disease management.
losses as high as 100%. The disease can inflict a huge yield loss in
Resistance by itself is not sufficient alone, if it is not integrated with
susceptible varieties. The yield loss of about 67% is observed in the
other disease management method. The various research systems
susceptible bean variety Mexican-142 with anthracnose severity of
in the country have managed to develop and release numerous
77 %. This pathogen becomes minor disease in some localities and
haricot bean varieties that possess good level of CBB resistance.
major in humid, high rain fall areas of Ethiopia [31-35].
Gofta (G-2816) is one of the varieties which have resistant gene
against CBB in Ethiopia. AG-7117 lines were reported from Turkey Ecology and epidemiology
to be resistant to Xap. Mutlu developed an ABCP-8 genotype using
resistance markers SAP6 and SU91 that showed greater resistance Common bean anthracnose is particularly important in Uganda,
to common bacterial blight. Miklas, developed USDK-CBB-15, a Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Ethiopia and Congo. The
dark red kidney, USWK-CBB-17 (a white kidney), and USCRCBB- initiation of anthracnose epidemics starts from primary inoculum
20 (a cranberry) that had disease scores of 3.6 (the most resistant), sources (infected seed, infested debris and soil) and their effect
4.8, and 5.3. Marker assisted selection for disease resistant cultivar on seed yield and quality. The primary inoculum sources had
development is the classical method now the world is using. This differential effect on levels of disease development assessed at
experience should be practiced in Ethiopia, since there is diverse flowering, podding, and yield and seed quality compared to treated
gene in wild type which can be used as a source of disease resistance seeds. Seed is the main means for spreading from year to year and
[17]. from location to location [36-40].
Chemical control methods: Pesticide use in plant disease For the epidemics of the pathogen environmental condition
management is one of the components of integrated disease such as cool and wet weather favor the occurrence and yield loss.
management approach. There is bactericide used to control CBB, Temperatures of 13°C-26°C with an optimum of 17°C, relative
when applied at the right time. Copper containing pesticide is humidity above 92% and free moisture favour the germination of
effective to control this pathogen. Kocide, Copper hydroxide and spores and initial infection.
bactericide is the best fungicide/bactericide which controls the
The spores of anthracnose can spread by insects, animals and man,
pathogen. Fungicide such as Copper sulphate, Copper hydroxide,
especially when the foliage is moist. Frequent shower of the leaf
and Potassium methyl dithiocarbamate can control leaf infection.
and cool temperature is among climatic elements which further
It is reported that application of copper-based bactericides
aggravate disease epidemics. Primary infection can occur anytime
could reduce population of the bacteria. Applying these contact
during growth at cool, wet weather however, secondary infections
bactericides early in the seasons can decrease the severity of
can occur from spores forming on infected plants and spreading in
bacterial pathogen [18, 19]. Foliar sprays of Kocide-101 chemical at
wind and splashing rain, or being transported on equipment [41,
the rate of 3.0 kg ha-1 at two times were reducing CBB epidemics
42].
on common bean, increased seed yield and yield components of
the crop and net return over cultivars at Eastern Amhara Region Management of common bean anthracnose
of Ethiopia. Frequent use of single active ingredient made the
pathogen to change the genetic makeup and results gene mutation. Cultural method: Growing common bean in cultivar mixture
Therefore, availing different active ingredient having products will is one strategy of controlling anthracnose. Cultivar mixtures are
reduce resistance development among pests [20]. among anthracnose management option by integrating at least 50%
of a resistant cultivar can control the disease. The level of control
Economic importance of Anthracnose on common bean achieved depends upon the proportion of the resistant cultivar in
in Ethiopia the mixture, i.e., the higher the percentage of the resistant cultivar
in the mixture, the lower the disease severity. Bean debris previously
Bean anthracnose is caused by Colletothricum lindemuteianum and infected should be removed after harvest to reduce winter survival
it was first discovered in Germany. The pathogen is distributed and gradually to reduce the inoculum level. When plant parts
worldwide including Ethiopia and affects all vegetative anatomy are wet the pathogen easily sporulates and further spread from
as well as seeds. The disease anthracnose is a seed-borne disease diseased plants to healthy ones. Seeds from previous infected field
and can easily establish to uninfected areas. In seed multiplication with anthracnose should not be used as planting materials. The
program on farmers’ field, the released variety Roba-1 failed to give

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 6

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

production of disease free seeds in the area where environments are 2.6% to 7.8% for every unit increase in rust severity. common bean
not conducive for anthracnose is among integrated management disease assessment in Metekel Zone indicate that, less than 50%
options. Crop rotation for two years with non-associated crop is prevalence, 19.3% incidence and 2.5% common bean rust severity
recommended to reduce inoculum source and the methods also was recorded. This result indicate that in assessed environment the
serve to minimize inoculum load. Anthracnose of common bean pathogen is not major [56,57].
can also be managed by hot-water seed treatment and resulting that
the treated seed did not show germination problem [43-46]. Ecology and epidemiology
Host resistance: The production and the use of anthracnose The intensity of U. appendiculatus is influenced by cropping system,
resistant variety is one management measure that is effective, geographical area, altitude and season. Based on climatic condition,
safe and cheap in dealing with the disease. Glasshouse and field the level of rust in humid and sub-humid agro ecologies is low and
experiments were carried out to identify bean genotypes that are intermediate level of rust in sub-humid and moist agro-ecologies
resistant to the Ethiopian isolates of C. lindemuthianum and as a were reported. Similarly, the magnitude of the pathogen occurrence
result, genotypes Widusa, GLP X 1132, A482, A 193, G-7, HAL 5 is based on location, weed management and plant density. Good
and G 2333 were identified as sources of Anthracnose resistance. indications are found in many common bean growing areas of
In addition, genotypes RAZ-18 and REN-20 possess field resistance Ethiopia [58].
to Anthracnose and Angular leaf spot. Some knowledge was gained
Similarly, varietal proportion (susceptible: resistant) in a bean
during the past few years on the degree of variability in the pathogen
crop and geographic area play a role in determining the spread of
[47]. This disease complicated by the presence of several forms or
the disease over space. Depending upon the location, the speed
races of the fungus, and the fact that plants resistant to one race
with which spores of U. appendiculatus travel in a bean crop with
may be susceptible to another. In the common bean Anthracnose
a mixture of 20% susceptible variety and 80% resistant variety
interaction, different genes having resistance been reported so far
is about 2.5 to 5 times slower than in a bean crop with a pure
in different parts of the world. There is the source of Anthracnose
susceptible variety. In tropical and subtropical climates severe losses
resistance gene indicating that cultivars AB 136 and G 2333 could
occur due to rust epidemics in common bean growing regions of
be used as sources of resistance in the bean breeding program since
the world [59].
they are found to be highly resistant or immune to different races
of C. lindemuthianum found in Africa, North and Central America Management of common bean rust
[48].
Cultural practice: Common bean rust can be managed by cleaning
Chemical control methods: Chemotherapy has a role to play in the
the field and removing alternate host grown around the field. Crop
control of Anthracnose, particularly in large-scale bean production.
rotation, proper handling of the field by reducing succulence of the
Data generated from efficacy trials on fungicides evaluation revealed
crop by weeding is the major activities in managing the pathogen.
that a combination of dressing common bean seeds with Benomyl
In the Hararghe highlands, for instance, rust incidence and severity,
and a foliar spray of bean plants with Difenoconazole or foliar
respectively, are reduced by about 25% and 16% in intercropping
application of Difenoconazole alone adequately protects common
[60]. Growing common bean in cultivar mixture is one strategy
beans against Anthracnose. Benlate used as a seed dressing at a
of controlling common bean diseases. Growing resistant cultivar
rate of 2 g/kg seed, Difenoconazole at a rate of 87.5 g a.i., per ha
having 50% resistant reaction with cultivar mixtures can control
as a foliar spray reduced Anthracnose severity and incidence and
the disease. The study on cultivar mixture indicate that, higher the
increased the yield per plot and 100 g seed weight. Seed treatment
percentage of the resistant cultivar in the mixture, the lower the
by Mancozeb at a rate of 3 g/kg seeds followed by application of
disease severity. Bean debris previously infected should be removed
Carbendazim foliar spray at a rate of 0.5 kg/ha and Carbendazim
after harvest to reduce winter survival and gradually to reduce the
seed treatment at a rate of 2 g/kg seeds followed by Carbendazim
inoculum level [61].
foliar spray at a rate of 0.5 kg/ha have been suggested to reduce
Anthracnose severity and incidence [49]. Host resistance: There is genetic variability among varieties toward
rust as stated by Habtu and Zadoks. Many of the genotypes exhibit
Economic significance of common bean rust multiple resistances (resistance to two or more of the major diseases):
Common bean rust, Anthracnose, Common bacterial blight and
Bean Rust (BR) caused by Uromyces phaseoli has a wide geographical
Angular leaf spot. Among bean genotypes evaluate in the open
distribution and one of the major common bean diseases occurring
environment where the major disease reported, HAL-5, Atndaba,
in most parts of Ethiopia. Although it can infect many species of
Awash Melka, Pan-173, A-197, TY-3396-1, Zebra, A-409, Bat-73, Bat24,
Phaseolus it has been particularly damaging to haricot bean in this
Bonita nigra, Redlands pioneer, Xan-175, Emp-87, Emp-110, Hal-5, Pvad-
country. It pauses one of the most important production problems
1022, Pan 173, Pva-1145, Xan-41, Pan-64, Ica-15541, Icapijas, Xan-162,
in areas such as Hawassa, Jimma, Bako, Hararghe, and Melkassa
Zaa-84057, TY-3396-16, Bat-1629, G-3124, G-11044, G-19428 and
[50-55].
G-19792 showed multiple disease resistance reaction. Rust resistant
Common bean rust causes yield loss up to 85%. Bean rust caused bean varieties such as ‘‘Yocto Negro’’ are available in Ethiopia. The
by Uromyces phaseoli is widely distributed wherever common bean majority of the recently released varieties are resistant/moderately
is grown and is one of the most economically important diseases resistant to rust and two or more of haricot bean diseases. Most
of common bean, causing 25% to 100% yield loss in susceptible of bean variety in Ethiopia is horizontally resistant in which their
cultivars. The loss caused by Bean rust is mainly related to the resistance can be checked by environmental condition [62].
reduction in the number of pods per plant which is directly resulted
Chemical control: Recently recommended chemical are effective
due to infection of photosynthetic parts. According to Habtu, the
to this pathogen if appropriately applied at right time. In Integrated
seed yield loss for each unit increase in rust severity ranges from

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 7

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

rust management approach, application of fungicide can be a Ecology and epidemiology

very effective tool for rust management [63]. Triazole (DMI,
FRAC 3) fungicides, including Proline, Folicur and generics, The epidemics of halo blight occur when the temperatures are cooler
are among the most effective rust products available. Fungicides and rapidly increase during the rainy period. Under high rainfall
such as Tebuconazole, Chlorothalonil, Propiconazole, Mancozeb and humidity, the disease is severe, with maximum development
and Maneb are effective in controlling rust, which is essential to around 28°C temperature. For Pseudomonas syringae development
improve economic return, requires good disease monitoring and a and cause yield loss the optimal temperature thrives is 20°C-23°C.
weather forecasting system [64]. Above 28°C, Halo blight disease symptoms will usually not develop
even though some water soaked spots may be present. The cool and
Economic significance of halo blight on common bean humid environments favor the pathogen, occurring in tropical and
sub-tropical regions in Africa and South America. The pathogen
Halo blight is caused by Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola and the gets in to the plant through wounds or stomata and hydathodes
pathogen is a strict aerobe, and is rod shaped with a gram negative during periods of high relative humidity. Rain splash can allow the
staining reaction. This pathogen is seed-borne and recently it is disease to spread rapidly, especially when there is a widespread wind
a major in common bean growing areas of Ethiopia. Among to allow the bacteria to transmit even farther. Human or animal
Common bean diseases, halo blight is major pathogen causing can also allow for the spread of the disease by contaminating the
economic significance that can plague common bean production infected filed to uninfected areas through moisture. The mammal
worldwide. Previously this pathogen is counted as intermediate in can spread the disease to a whole new environment and introduce
causing economic loss, but now a day it is very important pathogen the pathogen to new hosts (Figure 6) [66].
which needs attention to find management option. Regarding
the re-emerged pathogen called Halo blight there is some effort Subsequently halo blight invades the intercellular spaces, causing a
made to identify the distribution and characteristic features of gradual dissolution of the middle lamella. The stem is entered in
the pathogen in Ethiopia [65]. It is not always possible to separate three ways: via the stomata of the hypocotyl and epicotyl; through
the losses caused by Common bacterial blight and Halo blight, the vascular system of the leaf; or from infected cotyledons. The
since they often occur at the same time in the production field. pathogen remains in the seed coat and when the seed germinates,
However recent study reported that it causes yield losses of up resulting in infection of the newly emerged seedling. The bacterium
to 45%. Additionally, the severity of blight varies depending on can remain viable for several years beneath the seed coat during
climatic conditions mainly, temperature, relative humidity and rain storage period and easily causes during the plantations if condition
fall. Common bean yield losses estimated at 22% and 45% have is conducive.
been obtained by natural and artificial infections, respectively, in
Colombia.
Management of common bean halo blight

The characteristic symptoms of Halo blight are induced on leaves, Cultural practice: To early manage the epidemics of Halo blight,
stems, pods, and seeds. Initially the leaf symptoms appear as water- reduction of initial inoculum source such as field sanitation, crop
soaked spots which gradually enlarge and frequently coalesce with rotation whenever feasible, planting healthy seed, early incorporation
adjacent lesion. The tissues appear flaccid and lesions are often of bean debris into soil, burning of infected crop remains and seed
encircled by narrow area of lemon-yellow tissue when infected. treatment among the common recommended cultural practice. In
After infection cell death develops and may become widespread addition, planting disease free seed, avoiding disease by suitable
enough to cause defoliation. The infection occurred when the pods choice of planting date and crop rotation is among options. In spite
were young; the seed may deterioration or crumpled and shriveled. of the importance of the disease much research attention has not
If the bacteria enter by way of the funiculus, only the hilum may be been given to this disease on management options. Its economic
discolored, but this is true only for white colored varieties and it is importance increases now a day and this pathogen are counted
difficult to detect on dark-seeded varieties. as re-emerging disease in Ethiopia. Therefore, research on biology
and epidemiology should be conducted and develop management
strategies (Figure 7).

Figure 6: Sign of rust on common bean, Picture taken by Endriyas G., 2021 from Dugda district.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 8

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

Figure 7: Halo blight symptom on mungbean and haricot bean.

Host resistance: Plant pathogen interaction for disease resistance blight respectively.
is the effective method to reduce the effect of crop loss worldwide.
Sources of disease resistance to major common bean diseases CONCLUSION
have been identified and used in cultivar development programs.
Various sources of tolerance to Halo blight have been identified, In conclusion, except Rust, Anthracnose, Halo blight and
but breeding is complicated by the fact that different genetic Common bacterial blight is seed borne and easily spread by seed
systems control the reactions in pods and leaves. Halo blight is to long distance. Disease free seed and improved planting materials
cause by nine races, however race 1, 2, 5, 6 (the most common), should be provided for the farmers to boost the production and
and 7 are distributed worldwide. Designation of races has been productivity of common bean. Common bean diseases can be
defined by differential cultivar that means the reaction of specific managed by cultural, chemical and host resistance.
bean cultivars to specific race. Information on race types and their It is recommended that, Common bean seed should pass through
variability are important for resistance breeding [67]. quarantine system to the county. The research should thoroughly
Chemical control: There is bactericide used to control Halo concentrate on germplasm screening to obtain multiple disease
blight, when applied at the right time. Copper based pesticides are resistant varieties to replace susceptible common bean variety.
effective to control this pathogen. Kocide 2000, Copper hydroxide Country wide survey is important for early detection of newly
and bactericide is the best fungicide/bactericide which controls the emerging and identifying the status of existing diseases. Integrated
pathogen. Mancozeb seed treatment at a rate of 3 kg seeds and such disease management strategies should have to be developed by
seed borne pathogen is managed by seed treatment with antibiotics using compatible management options. Studies on epidemiological
i.e. streptomycin. element should have to be conducted to identify the biology
common bean diseases.
DISCUSSION
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Common bean is used as sources of income to smallholder farmers
and as exchange earning commodity worldwide. It is rich in starch The authors declare no conflict of interest.
and source of potassium, selenium, molybdenum, thiamine,
vitamin B6 and folic acid. The green unripe pods are cooked or
REFERENCES
conserved as vegetable and the ripe seeds cooked for “nifro” or 1. Alemu ZG, Oosthuizen LK, van Schalkwyk HD. The effect and persistence
boiled with mixed with sorghum or maize and can be consumed of major changes in economic policies on the long-term performance
as “woti” using powder form. The crop serve as soil fertility (trend) of Ethiopian agriculture. 2003.
improvement, livestock feed, soil erosion control, source of fuel 2. Kenneni G, Ahmed S, Malhotra R, Beniwal S, Makkouk K, Halila MH.
and a range of other benefits. Food and forage legumes of Ethiopia: Progress and prospects. Ali K, editor.
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas. 2006.
It is summarized that, this high value crop is constrained by
3. Alzate-Marin AL, Baía GS, de Paula TJ, de Carvalho GA, de Barros EG,
Anthracnose, Rust, Web blight, Angular leaf spot, Leaf blight, Moreira MA. Inheritance of anthracnose resistance in common bean
Floury leaf spot, Rhizoctonia solani, Fusarium wilt, Sclerotium rolffsii, differential cultivar AB 136. Plant Dis. 1997;81(9):996-998.
Common bacterial blight, Halo blight, Common bean mosaic 4. Anonyms. “Research on haricot bean production in Ethiopia” 1972-
virus and Root rot nematode. Among these; Anthracnose, Rust, 76. Swedish University of Agricultural Scinces. Department of Plant
Common bacterial blight, Halo blight and Angular leaf spot are Husbandry, rapport 82. Uppsala. 1980;288.
more important and widely distributed. This review was made 5. Atnaf M, Tesfaye K, Dagne K. The importance of legumes in the
on economic importance of disease, disease ecology, disease Ethiopian farming system and overall economy: An overview. Am J Exp
epidemiology and management options of Common bacterial Agric. 2015;7(6):347-358.
blight, Halo blight, Anthracnose and Rust. The maximum 6. Bako Agricultural Research Center (BARC). Bako Research Center;
common bean yield loss identified as 100%, 85%, 62% and 45% “Crop protection division progress report for 2001/2”. Bako Agricultural
was caused by anthracnose, rust, common bacterial blight and halo Research Center, Bako Ethiopia. 2002.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 9

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

7. BARC. Bako Research Center; “Crop protection division progress report 27. Ferris S, Kaganzi E. Evaluating marketing opportunities for haricot beans
for 1996/97”. Bako Agricultural Research Center, Bako Ethiopia. 1997. in Ethiopia.
8. BARC. Bako Research Center; “Crop protection division progress report 28. Lemessa F. Effects of intercropping and cultivar mixtures on bean diseases
for 1998/99”. Bako Agricultural Research Center, Bako Ethiopia. 1999. and yield. PMJoE. 2004.
9. BARC. Bako Research Center; Crop protection division progress report 29. Fininsa C. Epidemiology of beans bacterial blight and maize rust in
for 1997/98. Bako Agricultural Research Center, Bako Ethiopia. 1998. intercropping. Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Sweden,
Uppsala. 2001.
10. Batureine MJ. Diversity of Colletotrichum lindemuthianum and reaction
of common bean germplasm to anthracnose disease. B. Sc. AGR-Hons: 30. Fininsa C, Tefera T. Effect of primary inoculum sources of bean common
Crop Option), Makerere University, Uganda. 2009. bacterial blight on early epidemics, seed yield and quality aspects. Int J Pest
Management. 2001;47(3):221-225.
11. Beshir T. “Biology and Control of Bean Anthracnose in Ethiopia”. A
PhD. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, 31. Fininsa C, Yuen J. Temporal progression of bean common bacterial blight
University of Free State. Bloemfontein, South Africa. 2003. (Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli) in sole and intercropping systems.
Eur J Plant Pathol. 2002;108(6):485-495.
12. Boersma JG, Hou A, Gillard CL, McRae KB, Conner RL. Impact of
common bacterial blight on the yield, seed weight and seed discoloration 32. Fininsa C. Effect of intercropping bean with maize on bean common
of different market classes of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Canadian J bacterial blight and rust diseases. Int J Pest Manag. 1996;42(1):51-54.
Plant Sci. 2015;95(4):703-710.
33. Bejiga GE. Ascochyta blight situation of chickpea in Ethiopia. Ascochyta
13. DiFonzo C, Jewett M, Warner F, Brown-Rytlewski D, Kirk W. Insect, Blight and Winter Sowing of Chickpeas; Saxena, MC, Singh, KB, Eds.
nematode, and disease control in Michigan field crops. MSU Bull E-1582. 1984:269-271.
Michigan State University. East Lansing, MI. 2006;48824.
34. Getachew T. Pulse crops production opportunities, challenges and its
14. Buruchara R, Mukankusi C, Ampofo K. Bean Diseases and Pest value chain in Ethiopia: A review article. JEES. 2019;9(1):20-29.
Identification and Management. Kampala, UG: International Center
for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); Pan-African Bean Research Alliance 35. Gilbertson RL, Maxwell DP. “Common bacterial blight of bean”. Prentice
(PABRA)-Handbook for Small Scale Seed Producers. 2010. Hall Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA. 1992.

15. Bush E. “Anthracnose on Snap Beans. Virginia Pest Management Guide 36. Goodwin M. “Crop Profile-Dry Beans (including white and colored)
for Home Grounds and Animals”. (VCE Publication 450-719). Virginia Phaseolus vulgaris”. 2003.
Cooperative Extension, Virginia State University, USA. 2009. 37. Habtu A, Sache I, Zadoks JC. A survey of cropping practices and foliar
16. Central Statistical Agency (CSA). The Federal Democratic Republic of diseases of common beans in Ethiopia. Crop prot. 1996;15(2):179-186.
Ethiopia, Agricultural Sample Survey 2014/2015 Volume V, Report on 38. Assefa H. Epidemiology of bean rust in Ethiopia. Wageningen University
area, production and farm management practice of belg season crops for and Research. 1994.
private peasant holdings. Statistical Bulletin 578. Ethiopia. 2015.
39. Tayler RS. Potential for field beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in West Asia and
17. Cortés AJ, Monserrate FA, Ramírez-Villegas J, Madriñán S, Blair MW. North Africa. Proceedings of a regional workshop in Aleppo, Syria, 21-23
Drought tolerance in wild plant populations: the case of common beans May, 1983: Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Cali, Colombia.
(Phaseolus vulgaris L.). PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e62898. Agric Syst. 1986;19(4):319.
18. Coyne DP, Schuster ML. Breeding and genetic studies of tolerance 40. Kassahun A. Reaction of common bean cultivars to Xanthomonas axonopodis
to several bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) bacterial pathogens. Euphytica. pv. phaseoli strains and integrated management of common bacterial blight
1974;23(3):651-656. in Eastern Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Haramaya: Haramaya University.
19. CSA (Central Statistical Agency). Federal democratic republic of Ethiopia. 2008.
Agricultural sample survey 2009/2010 (2002 E.C.). Addis Ababa, 41. Kumar A, Sharma PN, Sharma OP, Tyagi PD. Epidemiology of bean
Ethiopia. 2010. anthracnose Colletotrichum lindemuthianum under sub-humid mid-hills
20. CSA (Central Statistical Agency). Federal democratic republic of Ethiopia. zone of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Phytopathol. 1999;52(4):393-397.
Agricultural sample survey 2018/2019 (2011 E.C.). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 42. Vauterin L, Hoste B, Kersters K, Swings J. Reclassification of Xanthomonas.
2018. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 1995;45(3):472-489.
21. Darrasse A, Carrere S, Barbe V, Boureau T, Arrieta-Ortiz ML, Bonneau 43. Legesse D, Kumssa G, Assefa T, Taha M, Gobena J, Alemaw T, et al.
S. Genome sequence of Xanthomonas fuscans subsp. fuscans strain 4834-R Production and marketing of white pea beans in the Rift Valley, Ethiopia.
reveals that flagellar motility is not a general feature of xanthomonads. A Sub-Sector Analysis. National Bean Research Program of the Ethiopian
BMC genomics. 2013;14(1):1-30. Institute of Agricultural Research. 2006.
22. Degu T, Yaregal W, Gudisa T. Status of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris 44. Lemessa F, Tesfaye A. Evaluation of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) genotypes
L.) diseases in metekel zone, north west Ethiopia. J Plant Pathol Microbiol. for multiple resistance to angular and floury leaf spot diseases. Trop Sci.
2020;11:494. 2005;45(2):63-66.
23. Dursun A, Figen Dönmez M, Şahin F. Identification of resistance to 45. Mahuku GS, Jara CE, Cajiao C, Beebe S. Sources of resistance to
common bacterial blight disease on bean genotypes grown in Turkey. Eur Colletotrichum lindemuthianum in the secondary gene pool of Phaseolus
J Plant Pathol. 2002;108(8):811-813. vulgaris and in crosses of primary and secondary gene pools. Plant Dis.
24. EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH). Scientific Opinion on the pest 2002;86(12):1383-1387.
categorisation of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli and Xanthomonas 46. Alemu A, Nebiyu A, Getachew M. Growth and yield of common bean
fuscans subsp. fuscans. EFSA Journal. 2014;12(10):3856. (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars as influenced by rates of phosphorus at
25. EPPA (Ethiopian Pulses Profile Agency). “Ethiopian Export Promotion Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia. J Agric Biotech Sustain Dev. 2018;10(6):104-
Agency Product Development and Market Research Directorate, 115.
Ethiopia”. 2004;25. 47. Miklas P, Smith J, Singh SH. Release of common bacterial blight resistant
26. Félix-Gastélum R, Maldonado-Mendoza IE, Navarrete-Maya R, Olivas- dark red kidney bean germplasm line USDK-CBB-15. ANNUAL
Peraza NG, Brito-Vega H, Acosta-Gallegos JA. Identification of Pseudomonas REPORT-BEAN IMPROVEMENT COOPERATIVE. 2005;48:192.
syringae pv. phaseolicola as the causal agent of halo blight in yellow beans in 48. Mmbaga MT, Steadman JR, Eskridge KM. Virulence patterns of Uromyces
northern Sinaloa, Mexico. Phytoparasitica. 2016;44(3):369-378. appendiculatus from different geographical areas and implications for
finding durable resistance to rust of common bean. J Phytopathol.
1996;144(11‐12):533-541.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 10

Gabrekiristos E, et al.

49. MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development) “Crop 59. Steadman JR, Pastor-Corrales MA, Beaver JS. An overview of the 3rd bean
Development”. Issue No.3.Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 2009. rust and 2nd bean common bacterial blight international workshops,
March 4-8, 2002, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa. Annual Report-Bean
50. Mohammed A, Ayalew A, Dechassa N. Effect of integrated management Improvement Cooperative. 2002;45:120-124.
of bean anthracnose (Colletotrichum lindemuthianum Sacc. and Magn.)
through soil solarization and fungicide applications on epidemics of the 60. Stewart RB, Yiroou D. Index of plant diseases in Ethiopia. Bull. Exp. Stn
disease and seed health in Hararghe Highlands, Ethiopia. J Plant Pathol Coll. Agric. Halle Selassie Univ. 1967;30.
Microb. 2013;4(182):2.
61. Taylor JD, Teverson DM, Allen DJ, PASTOR‐CORRALES MA.
51. Muoni T, Barnes AP, Öborn I, Watson CA, Bergkvist G, Shiluli M, et al. Identification and origin of races of Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola
Farmer perceptions of legumes and their functions in smallholder farming from Africa and other bean growing areas. Plant Pathol. 1996;45(3):469-
systems in east Africa. Int J Agric Sustain. 2019;17(3):205-218. 478.
52. Mutlu N, Miklas PN, Steadman JR, Vidaver AM, Lindgren DT, Reiser 62. Tesfaye B. “Biology and Control of Bean Anthracnose in Ethiopia”. A
J, et al. Registration of common bacterial blight resistant pinto bean PhD thesis submitted in fulfillment of requirements for the degree of
germplasm line ABCP-8. Papers in Plant Pathol. 2005:61. Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences,
(Plant Pathology), University of the Free State Bloemfontein, South
53. Odogwu BA, Nkalubo ST, Mukankusi C, Paparu P, Patrick R, Kelly J, et Africa. 2003; 144.
al. Prevalence and variability of the common bean rust in Uganda. Afr J
Agric Res. 2016;11(49):4990-4999. 63. Beshir T. Less assessment study on haricot bean due to anthracnose.
PMJoE. 1997.
54. Opio F, Namayanja A. Common bacterial blight of beans research in
Uganda 1986-2001. Annual report-bean improvement cooperative. 64. Tock AJ, Fourie D, Walley PG, Holub EB, Soler A, Cichy KA, et al.
2002;45:162-163. [Google Scholar] Genome-wide linkage and association mapping of halo blight resistance
in common bean to race 6 of the globally important bacterial pathogen.
55. Perkins JM, Smith DR, Kinsey JG, Dowden DL. “Prevalence and control Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:1170.
of gray leaf spot”.31st Annual Conference of the Illinosis Corn Breeders’
School. Univ. of Illinois. 1995; 6-7. 65. Yoshii K, Galvez GE, Alvarez G. Estimation of yield losses in beans caused
by common blight (Phaseolus vulgaris, Xanthomonas phaseoli). Fitopatologia
56. Mvile B. Genotype x environment interaction of common bean (Phaseolus Colombiana (Colombia). 1977.
vulgaris L.) genotypes on reaction to four bean diseases (Doctoral
dissertation, Sokoine University of Agriculture). 2015. 66. Yesuf M, Sangchote S. Seed transmission and epidemics of Colletotrichum
lindemuthianum in the major common bean growing areas of Ethiopia.
57. Selamawit C. Occurrence of common bacterial blight strains and its effect Agric Nat Resour. 2005;39(1):34-45.
on quality of bean seeds in Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation, M.Sc Thesis
presented to School of Graduate Studies of Alemaya University). 67. Zaumeyer WJ. The bacterial blight of beans caused by Bacterium phaseoli.
Technical Bulletin of the United States Department of Agriculture.
58. Singh K, Rawal HS, Singh S, Gumber RK. Physiological specialization in 1930;186:1–34.
Uromyces fabae causing rust of lentil. Lens Newsl. 1995;22:46-47.

J Plant Pathol Microbiol, Vol. 13 Iss. 06 No: 1000619 11