Next Article in Journal
Life Cycle Assessment of Argentinian Dry Bean Flour
Previous Article in Journal
Horticultural Plant Production Using Hydroponic Technique
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini †

by
Mahlodi R. Maripa
1,*,
Titus Y. Ngmenzuma
1,* and
Felix D. Dakora
2,*
1
Department of Crop Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
2
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 5th International Electronic Conference on Agronomy (IECAG 2025), 15–18 December 2025; Available online: https://sciforum.net/event/IECAG2025.
Biol. Life Sci. Forum 2026, 57(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/blsf2026057004
Published: 25 March 2026
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 5th International Electronic Conference on Agronomy (IECAG 2025))

Abstract

Legume crops, such as the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), are significant in many Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, including Eswatini, due to their numerous health benefits, including high protein, fiber, vitamins, and mineral content. Common beans are a staple food in many parts of the world and play a crucial role in nitrogen fixation, thereby improving soil fertility. A field experiment was conducted at Malkerns research station, Eswatini, using 27 common bean genotypes to assess their ability for N-fixation and water relations using the 15N and 13C natural abundance techniques. The data revealed significant differences among the common bean genotypes. Genotypes Cim-Rm-36 and Mwctz20a-Rm19 recorded an increase in plant growth by (6% and 5.74%), N content (5.69% and 5.97%) and greater C content (6.1% and 5.67%) while genotype Mwctz20a-Rm19 also showed an increase in N-fixation (155.73 kg.ha−1). Genotype Mwctz20a-Rm-4 had the highest grain yield (1747.39 kg.ha−1), while genotype Cim-Rm-14-Als61 had the highest N concentration (3.50%), indicating efficient N uptake. The genotypes with the lowest δ13C values (−27.38‰ to −28.06‰) suggested similar water use efficiency among the genotypes. The findings of this study revealed that common beans can make a significant contribution to N fertility under drought conditions. Genotypes Cim-Rm-36, Mwctz20a-Rm19, and Mwctz20a-Rm-4 showed desirable characteristics and can be good candidates for possible inclusion in breeding programs. These results have implications for improving common bean production in drought-prone areas and promoting sustainable agriculture practices.

1. Introduction

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is an important legume crop contributing to food security and nutritional well-being, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa [1]. It serves as a key source of protein, fiber, essential macro-micronutrients, carbohydrates, minerals, and nutrition for millions of people. In Eswatini, common bean is a vital crop, with over 80% of the country’s agricultural land dedicated to its production [2]. Common bean plays a crucial role in traditional cropping systems, contributing to nitrogen fixation and improving soil fertility [3]. Its significance extends beyond local consumption, as it boosts the national economy by serving as a key source of food and a valuable export commodity, generating income, creating jobs, and supporting livelihoods for smallholder farmers [4]. However, despite its importance, common bean production in Eswatini faces significant challenges. Soil fertility constraints, particularly nitrogen deficiency, and limited rainfall or irrigation, hinder production [5]. The use of chemical fertilizers in sub-Saharan Africa is limited due to high costs, environmental pollution, and unavailability of resources to poor rural farmers [6,7]. Climate change also poses a significant threat to global food security and agricultural productivity [8]. As a result, there is a pressing need to identify and promote climate-resilient agricultural practices that can mitigate these impacts [9]. Common bean can be grown in various environments; however, production is limited, particularly in regions with water scarcity. To address this challenge, 27 field-grown common bean genotypes were selected for symbiotic N performance, drought tolerance, and water use efficiency at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini. A few studies have shown that common beans in Africa can meet their nitrogen (N) requirements through symbiotic fixation and accumulate carbon [10]. However, the actual amounts of N-fixed can vary due to several biotic and abiotic factors [11]. While several studies have evaluated symbiotic N contribution in common bean, the data collected were based on only a few genotypes [5,12,13]. In addition, common bean is not only resilient to harsh conditions like drought and poor soils but also boosts soil fertility by fixing nitrogen on nutrient-poor soils, ultimately enhancing crop yields and improving food security for local communities [10,14,15]. The most common interaction between legume plants and microorganisms, commonly referred to as rhizobia, is symbiotic with rhizobacteria and known for their capacity to fix nitrogen [10]. Nodules are generated by the symbiotic connection between rhizobia and legume roots, which utilize nitrogenase to fix atmospheric N2. The interchange of nitrogen and carbon between the association nodulation root and its host plant is primarily responsible for controlling this relationship; the plant provides the bacteria with reduced carbohydrates, which the bacteria use as food and energy, and initiates the N2 fixation process [16]. However, high temperatures, low soil fertility, acidity, and drought can limit the amount of nitrogen fixation that legumes can fix, and bacterial conditions also reduce the effectiveness of biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) [17]. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess plant growth and symbiotic N nutrition, grain yield, C accumulation, and water use efficiency in 27 common bean genotypes grown under field conditions at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Site Description

A field experiment was conducted during the 2024 cropping season at the Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini, with reference GPS co-ordinates 26°33′18.33″ S; 31°10′10.29″ E, and elevation of 700 m above sea level. The area is classified as sub-tropical with an average annual rainfall ranging between 800 and 1000 mm and annual average temperatures ranging from 7 °C to 26.6 °C [18,19]. The soil type is categorized as Deep Red Loam under the Malkerns series soil classification [20]. The daily temperatures recorded during the experimental period (January 2024 to May 2024) ranged from 17.1 °C for minimum and 27.9 °C for maximum (Table 1). The average rainfall recorded during the study period was 121.72 mm. The climatic data recorded at the Malkerns research station during the experimental period (temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall) are described in Table 1.

2.2. Experimental Design and Planting

The 27 common bean genotypes were planted in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) and replicated four times per genotype. The genotypes were obtained from the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT–Malawi). The experiment was conducted in early January 2024 and plowing of the field was done mechanically, and harrowing was done using a disk plow. The seeds were sown on a flat surface, with an inter-row spacing of 50 cm and an intra-row spacing of 10 cm. The plot size was measuring 13.5 m2 (4.5 m × 3.0 m) and consisted of 4 rows with 20 plants per row. The experiment was conducted under natural rainfed conditions without irrigation or any chemical input. Two seeds were planted per hole and later thinned to one plant. About four to five weeks post-emergence, weeds were controlled manually using hand hoes.

2.3. Plant Sampling and Processing

Plant sampling for dry matter (DM) yield and isotopic analyses were done at an early pod-filling stage. Four plants were randomly sampled from the rows of each plot and separated into shoots and nodulated roots. The shoots were oven-dried at 65 °C (72 h) to a constant weight for shoot DM determination. The shoots were then ground to fine powder (0.85 mm sieve) and stored in vials for 15N and 13C analyses. Six non-leguminous weed species (namely, Cynodon dactylon, Bidens pilosa, Cyperus rotundus, Trifolium repens, Oxalis stricta, and Amaranthus retroflexus growing within the experimental plots were sampled as reference plants to determine the (%Ndfa) values of the common bean plants.

2.4. Measurement of Shoot N2 Fixation and C Accumulation

2.4.1. 15N/14N Isotopic Analysis

The 15N and 14N isotopic analyses were done at the Stable Light Isotope at the University of Cape Town (UCT) laboratory in South Africa. About 2.0 to 2.5 milligrams of finely crushed plant material were weighed and placed into aluminum (Al) tin capsules for the purpose of analyzing 15N/14N and the N concentration (%N) values. This analysis was performed utilizing a Carlo Erba NA1500 elemental analyzer that is linked to a Finnigan MAT 252 mass spectrometer (Finnigan, MAT CombH, Bremen, Germany) through the Conflo II Open-Split Device. The δ15N values of the common bean plants were computed using the equation described by [21].
δ N 15 = ( N 15 / N 14 ) sample ( N 15 / N 14 ) atm ( N 15 / N 14 ) atm × 1000
The ratio of the isotopes 15N and 14N in the sample is denoted as 15N/14N sample, while the atmospheric abundance ratio of nitrogen isotopes is denoted as 15N/14N atm.

2.4.2. Shoot N Content

Shoot %N was obtained directly from the mass spectrometer, and the shoot N content was calculated as the product of %N and shoot dry matter, as described by [22].
N content = %N shoot × dry mass shoot

2.4.3. The B-Value

The 15N natural abundance technique was used for N-fixation analyses. It is based on the principle that an effectively nodulated legume growing on a medium free from combined N (mineral N or organic N) is expected to be completely reliant upon symbiotic N2 fixation for its growth, and hence, the isotopic composition of the legume would be expected to be similar to that of atmospheric N2. A legume’s δ15N value, when grown in soil containing mineral N, is expected to resemble that of the soil mineral N [21]. Different non-legume plant species were collected from the experimental plots and used for the δ15N analyses and a B-value of −1.988‰ [21] was used for the calculations. The combined mean δ15N value of all the reference plant species sampled was +3.175.

2.4.4. Percent N Derived from Atmospheric Fixation

The proportion of N derived from the atmosphere (%Ndfa) was estimated as in [23]:
% Ndfa = δ N 15 ref δ N 15 leg δ N 15 ref Bvalue × 100
where δ15Nref is the 15N natural abundance of the reference plant, δ15Nleg is the 15N natural abundance of the legume, and the B-value is the 15N natural abundance of common bean plants deriving all their N nutrition from N2 fixation.

2.4.5. Amount of N-Fixed

The amount of fixed N (N-fixed) by the common bean plant was calculated as
N-fixed= %Ndfa × legume biomass N
where legume biomass N is the N content of the common bean shoots.

2.4.6. Soil N Uptake

The soil N uptake by the common bean plant was calculated as described by [21]:
Soil N uptake = (100 − %Ndfa) × legume biomass N

2.4.7. Measurements of 13C/12C and C Concentration

The 13C/12C isotopic analysis of bean shoots was performed at the Stable Light Isotope Laboratory, Department of Archaeology at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, as described for the 15N/14N isotopic analysis. Common bean shoot samples were analyzed to determine the ratio of 13C/12C and the C concentration (%C). The 13C natural abundance (or δ13C) was calculated as [24]:
δ C 13 = ( C 13 C 12 ) sample ( C 13 C 12 ) standard ( C 13 C 12 ) standard × 1000
where Rsample is the 13C/12C ratio of the sample and Rstandard is the 13C/12C isotopic ratio of PDB, a universally accepted standard from the Belemnite Pee Dee limestone formation. The %C of each plant sample was obtained directly from the mass spectrometric analysis.

2.4.8. C Content

The C content of common bean shoots was calculated as the product of C concentration and shoot weight, where C concentration (%C) was obtained directly from the mass spectrometer:

2.5. Statistical Data Analysis

The data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare means of the treatments using STATISTICA Software (version 10.1). The symbiotic N parameters and carbon accumulation parameters were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA to compare the performance of each genotype. Where treatment means were different, Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) was used to separate the means at p ≤ 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Shoot δ15N Values of Reference Plants

Six non-legume reference plant species were sampled and analyzed to calculate the %Ndfa of the common bean genotypes. The δ15N values of the reference plants ranged from +2.43‰ to +3.96‰ with a combined mean of +3.175‰ (Table 2).

3.2. Plant Growth

A one-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference (p ≤ 0.001) in shoot dry matter yield among the 27 common bean genotypes planted at the Malkerns research station, Eswatini. The shoot dry matter yield ranged from 17.88 g.plant−1 (genotype Mwctz20a-Rm19) to 47.43 g.plant−1 (genotype Cim-Rm-36) (Table 3). Three of the genotypes produced greater shoot biomass: Cim-Rm-36 (47.43 g.plant−1), Mwctz20a-Rm19 (45.39 g.plant−1), and M-Rm-15-D-A-21 (42.54 g.plant−1). Nine other genotypes recorded values within 30 g.plant−1, and 13 genotypes recorded values within 20 g.plant−1. The remaining genotypes showed the least shoot biomass of 17.88 g.plant−1 (M-S-15-D-F-1) and 18.37 g.plant−1 (M-S-16-A-1).

3.3. N Concentration and N Content

The N concentration and N content showed significant differences. Genotypes Cim-Rm-14-Als61 (3.50%) and C-Rm-14-A-C-27 (3.46%) exhibited the highest N concentration (Table 3). Twelve out of 27 genotypes recorded N concentration of approximately 3%, while the remaining 15 genotypes recorded N concentration of approximately 2%. The levels of N concentration for genotypes M-S-15-D-F-1, DAB 174, and M-Rm-15-F-E-6 were the same (2.57%).
The N content of the 27 common bean genotypes ranged from 470.52 mg.plant−1 (M-S-15-D-F-1) to 1401.57 mg.plant−1 (Mwctz20a-Rm19). Ten other genotypes accumulated N content between 1000 and 1410 mg.plant−1, and 17 genotypes recorded values below 1000 mg.plant−1. Genotype M-S-15-D-F-1 recorded the lowest N concentration (2.57%) and N content (470.52 mg.plant−1) (Table 3).

3.4. δ15N and %Ndfa Values of Common Bean Plants

The δ15N and %Ndfa of the common bean genotypes planted at Malkerns research station varied from −0.373‰ (M-S-16-A-F-7) to 2.18‰ (M-Rm-F-18) (Table 3). One genotype recorded the highest δ15N value of 2.18‰, followed by 12 other genotypes with values ranging approximately above 1‰. Eleven genotypes had δ15N values below 1‰, and the remaining two genotypes recorded values of −0.373‰ (M-S-16-A-F-7) and −0.202‰ (PAN 9216). These genotypes with the lowest δ15N values derived the most N from the atmosphere (%Ndfa), with the highest values of 68.81% and 65.48%, respectively. In contrast, the genotypes with the highest δ15N values recorded the lowest %Ndfa, such as M-Rm-F-18 (19.13%) and C-Rm-14-A-C-27 (26.63%). Eleven out of the 27 common bean genotypes derived over 50% or more N nutrition from the atmosphere.

3.5. Amount of N-Fixed

The amount of N-fixed revealed significant differences among the 27 common bean genotypes. The amount of N-fixed ranged from 52.28 kg.ha−1 (M-S-15-D-F-1) to 155.73 kg.ha−1 (M-Rm-15-F-19). Twelve out of the 27 common bean genotypes recorded N-fixed above 100 kg.ha−1, while the remaining 15 genotypes recorded values below 100 kg.ha−1 (Table 3). Only genotype M-S-15-D-F-1 fixed a N value below 60 kg.ha−1, resulting from a lower shoot dry matter yield (17.88 g.plant−1).

3.6. Soil N Uptake

The common bean genotypes differed markedly in their levels of soil N uptake. The soil N uptake ranged from 8.87 kg.ha−1 (M-S-15-D-F-1) to 50.58 kg.ha−1 (C-Rm-14-A-C-27) (Table 3). Three out of the 27 genotypes took about 40 kg.ha−1 (i.e., C-Rm-14-A-C-27, Cim-Rm-14-Als61, and Cim-Rm-36) from the soil, while nine other genotypes recorded values within 30 kg.ha−1. Four genotypes recorded values within 20 kg.ha−1, and the remaining 11 genotypes recorded values below 20 kg.ha−1.

3.7. Grain Yield

The grain yield of the common bean genotypes revealed a significant difference, ranging from 678.65 kg.ha−1 (C-S-15-Z-1) to 1747.39 kg.ha−1 (Mwctz20a-Rm-4). Twenty-two out of the 27 common bean genotypes recorded grain yields ranging from 1000 kg.ha−1 to 1700 kg.ha−1. In contrast, the remaining five genotypes produced the lowest grain yields: C-S-15-Z-1 (678.65 kg.ha−1), M-S-15-D-F-1 (765.62 kg.ha−1), M-S-15-D-E-22 (779.95 kg.ha−1), DAB 174 (850.26 kg.ha−1), and M-S-15-D-10 (920.57 kg.ha−1) (Table 3).

3.8. Carbon Concentration and C Content

The carbon (C) concentrations and carbon content values showed significant differences among the 27 common bean genotypes. The carbon (C) concentrations ranged from 39.08% (M-RM-15-F-E-6) to 41.15% (PAN 9216) (Table 4). Twelve out of 27 common bean genotypes recorded the highest carbon concentration of approximately 40%, and the remaining 15 genotypes recorded carbon concentrations of approximately 39%.
The carbon content values ranged from 715.75 mg.plant−1 (M-S-15-D-F-1) to 1927.07 mg.plant−1 (Cim-Rm-36). Twenty out of 27 common bean genotypes recorded the highest carbon content, ranging from 1000 mg.plant−1 to 1927.07 mg.plant−1, due to their greater biomass. Meanwhile, the remaining seven genotypes displayed the lowest carbon content, below 1000 mg.plant−1.

3.9. Shoot C:N Ratio

The C/N ratio recorded significant differences among the 27 common bean genotypes (Table 4). All genotypes recorded C/N ratios above 10, with the highest genotype being 16.45 g.g−1 (M-S-15-D-E-22) and the lowest being 11.54 g.g−1 (Cim-Rm-14-Als61).

3.10. δ13C Values of Common Bean Plants

The δ13C values showed non-significant differences (p > 0.05) among all 27 common bean genotypes, ranging from −29.8‰ to −21.6‰. Four out of 27 common bean genotypes recorded the highest δ13C values (least negative) M-S-16-A-1 (−21.6‰), C-S-15-Z-1 (−22.3‰), C-RM-14-A-C-2 (−22.3‰), and M-RM-16-D-F-11 (−22.4‰). The lowest δ13C values were recorded in genotypes M-S-15-D-F-1 (−29.8‰) and M-S-15-D-10 (−29.1‰), indicating their potentially lower water-use efficiency. Nineteen of the 27 common bean genotypes recorded similar shoot δ13C values, ranging from −28.9‰ to −27.2‰. Furthermore, four out of the 27 common bean genotypes (M-S-16-A-1, C-S-15-Z-1, C-RM-14-A-C-2, and M-RM-16-D-F-1) exhibited higher δ13C values and hence were considered to be low water-use efficient genotypes (Table 4).

4. Discussion

The study revealed three out of 27 genotypes, namely Cim-Rm-36 (47.43 g.plant−1), Mwctz20a-Rm19 (45.39 g.plant−1), and M-Rm-15-D-A-21 (42.54 g.plant−1), exhibited greater shoot biomass above 40 g.plant−1 and higher N concentration, N content, as well as a greater amount of N-fixed (Table 3). These genotypes with the highest symbiotic N parameters also recorded the highest grain yield Mwctz20a-Rm-4 (1747.39 kg.ha−1), M-Rm-15-F-6 (1648.52 kg.ha−1), M-Rm-16-D-F-11 (1627.60 kg.ha−1), C-Rm-14-A-C-27 (1458.33 kg.ha−1), Cim-Rm-36 (1433.59 kg.ha−1), M-Rm-15-D-A-21 (1420.56 kg.ha−1), and Mwctz20a-Rm19 (1347.66 kg.ha−1). [5] reported an increase in shoot biomass above 42 g.plant−1 and grain yield of 202,000 kg.ha−1 by common bean plants when treated with phosphorus. Moreover, [25] revealed that the greater biomass accumulation by common bean with high levels of atmospheric N2 fixation tends to exhibit greater grain yield. In contrast, the genotypes M-S-15-D-F-1 and M-S-16-A-1 performed poorly in terms of plant growth, N content, and amount of N-fixed among the 27 common bean genotypes. However, the poor performance could be attributed to environmental factors such as biotic and abiotic factors compared to other common bean genotypes [14,15,26,27] (Table 3). The grain yield showed significant variation among the 27 genotypes, ranging from 678.65 kg.ha−1 (C-S-15-Z-1) to 1747.39 kg.ha−1 (Mwctz20a-Rm-4). The top-performing genotypes for grain yield were Mwctz20a-Rm-4 (1747.39 kg.ha−1) followed by M-Rm-15-F-6 (1648 kg.ha−1). The δ15N values ranged from −0.373‰ to 2.18‰. Two out of the 27 genotypes show lower δ15N values for M-S-16-A-F-7 (−0.373‰) and PAN 9216 (−0.202‰). These genotypes with the lowest δ15N values derived most of their nitrogen from the atmospheric N2 fixation, with %Ndfa values of 68.81% and 65.48%, respectively. These genotypes are highly efficient and good nitrogen fixers, since they are able to capture more than 60% of their N requirement from the atmosphere and take up less N from the soil. These findings are consistent with previous studies [11,28] that reported lower δ15N values have capacity to fix nitrogen compared to non-fixing legumes. The genotypes with low value δ15N suggest a strong reliance on atmospheric nitrogen fixation [29]. Eleven out of 27 common bean genotypes could derive 50% or more of their N nutrition from the atmosphere. The findings are consistent with [28,29,30,31] which identified different genotypes with high biological nitrogen fixation (BNF), capable of deriving at least 50% of their nitrogen from the atmosphere.
The carbon concentration and carbon content in common bean plants ranged from (39.08% to 41.15%) and (715.75 to 1927.07 mg.plant−1). Twenty out of 27 common bean genotypes had the highest carbon content ranging from (1000–1927.07 mg.plant−1) due to greater shoot biomass, while 7 other genotypes recorded carbon content below (1000 mg.plant−1). Genotypes with the highest C content also recorded the highest shoot biomass and vice versa, which is consistent with previous studies [32,33]. The C:N ratio revealed significant variations among the 27 common bean genotypes, ranging from 11.54 g.g−1 in genotype Cim-Rm-14-Als61 to 16.45 g.g−1 in genotype M-S-15-D-E-22 (Table 4). The positive relationship between C:N ratio and grain yield suggests that genotypes with optimal C:N ratios tend to have higher grain yields. This has been observed in genotype Cim-Rm-36, which obtained a grain yield of 1433 kg.ha−1 and C:N ratio of 14.65 g.g−1 [24]. The stable carbon isotope composition in shoots revealed that a higher δ13C value (less negative) signifies greater water use efficiency (WUE), whereas a lower δ13C value (more negative) indicates lower WUE [24]. Four out of 27 common bean genotypes were found to have water use efficiency with (δ13C) values of less negative for genotypes M-S-16-A-1 (−21.64‰), C-S-15-Z-1 (−22.28‰), C-Rm-14-A-C-2 (−22.29‰), and M-Rm-16-D-F-11 (−22.43‰). These results are consistent with the study by [34], showing common bean genotypes with improved water use efficiency (WUE) identified through various studies. The δ13C values showed a strong link with WUE, indicating that genotypes with higher δ13C values (less negative) tend to have higher WUE. This is consistent with previous studies [24,35], who reported that δ13C values can be used as an indicator of WUE in plants. Recent studies have also confirmed the positive link between δ13C values and WUE in crops such as soybean [36]. Even though the exact mechanisms of water use efficiency by the genotypes were not determined; nevertheless, plant traits related to root morphology or root architecture often play key roles in the adaptation of plants to water-stressed environments [37].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study reveals significant variation in symbiotic parameters among common bean plants and successfully identifies genotypes that exhibit superior performance in shoot biomass, grain yield, N-fixation, and WUE. Genotypes Cim-Rm-36, Mwctz20a-Rm19, and M-Rm-15-D-A-21 exhibited greater shoot biomass and grain yield. In addition, M-S-16-A-F-7 and PAN 9216 showed high N-fixation efficiencies. Genotypes with optimal C:N ratios tended to exhibit increased grain yields, highlighting the importance of this parameter in determining crop productivity. The δ13C values of the common bean genotypes ranged from (−27.38‰ to −28.06‰) which is an indication that the genotypes have similar water requirements. These findings suggest that these genotypes possess significant potential for improving common bean production and promoting sustainable agricultural productivity.

Author Contributions

M.R.M.: Preparation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing—original draft. T.Y.N.: Conceptualization, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—review and editing. F.D.D.: Resources, Supervision, Writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research work was supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF), South Africa, under the grant number: PMDS230713134293, Tshwane University of Technology.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study conducted at Tshwane University of Technology, as part of the PhD candidacy, was reviewed and approved by the Faculty Committee for Postgraduate Studies (Science) FCPS and the Faculty Committee for Research Ethics (Science) FCRE at Tshwane University of Technology (TUT). The research project titled ‘Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini, did not involve human subjects or animal experimentation. The research was conducted in accordance with the university’s guidelines and policies, and all necessary approvals were obtained prior to commencement of the study.

Informed Consent Statement

A gatekeeper’s consent letter was obtained from Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini, granting permission to conduct the research study.

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the National Research Foundation and Tshwane University of Technology (TUT), for financial support. The authors are also grateful for the support from Manana and all staff of the Malkerns Research Station in Eswatini for helping with field experiments to obtain plant samples.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that this research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ANOVAAnalysis of variance
BNFBiological Nitrogen Fixation
C:NCarbon-to-Nitrogen ratio
CCarbon
DMDry matter
DMRTDuncan Multiple Range Test
FAOFood and Agriculture Organization N-Nitrogen
NRFNational Research Foundation SSA—Sub-Saharan African

References

  1. Philipo, M.; Ndakidemi, P.A.; Mbega, E.R. Importance of common bean genetic zinc biofortification in alleviating human zinc deficiency in sub-Saharan Africa. Cogent Food Agric. 2021, 7, 1907954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mekouar, M.A. 15. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Yearb. Int. Environ. Law 2018, 29, 448–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chekanai, V. Response of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to Rhizobia Inoculation, Nitrogen and Phosphorus Application on Smallholder Farms in Eastern Zimbabwe. Master’s Thesis, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kariuki, A.N. Upgrading Strategies and Food Security Implications on Smallholder Farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Value Chain Review. J. Food Secur. 2018, 6, 141–154. [Google Scholar]
  5. Samago, T.Y.; Anniye, E.W.; Dakora, F.D. Grain yield of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties is markedly increased by rhizobial inoculation and phosphorus application in Ethiopia. Symbiosis 2018, 75, 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Holden, S.T. Fertilizer and sustainable intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Food Secur. 2018, 18, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sane, M.; Hajek, M.; Nwaogu, C.; Purwestri, R.C. Subsidy as an economic instrument for environmental protection: A case of global fertilizer use. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Valavanidis, A. Extreme Weather Events Exacerbated by the Global Impact of Climate Change. 2023. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/368468689_Extreme_Weather_Events_Exacerbated_by_the_Global_Impact_of_Climate_Change_A_glimpse_of_the_future_if_climate_change_continues_unabated (accessed on 28 May 2023).
  9. Karavidas, I.; Ntatsi, G.; Vougeleka, V.; Karkanis, A.; Ntanasi, T.; Saitanis, C.; Agathokleous, E.; Ropokis, A.; Sabatino, L.; Tran, F.; et al. Agronomic practices to increase the yield and quality of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agronomy 2022, 12, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kebede, E. Contribution, utilization, and improvement of legumes-driven biological nitrogen fixation in agricultural systems. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 767998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chalk, P.M.; Craswell, E.T. An overview of the role and significance of 15N methodologies in quantifying biological N2 fixation (BNF) and BNF dynamics in agro-ecosystems. Symbiosis 2018, 75, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jansa, J.; Bationo, A.; Frossard, E.; Rao, I.M. Options for improving plant nutrition to increase common bean productivity in Africa. In Fighting Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Multiple Roles of Legumes in Integrated Soil Fertility Management; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 201–240. [Google Scholar]
  13. Muoni, T.; Jonsson, M.; Duncan, A.J.; Watson, C.A.; Bergkvist, G.; Barnes, A.P.; Öborn, I. Effects of management practices on legume productivity in smallholder farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Energy Secur. 2022, 11, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Farid, M.; Navabi, A. N2 fixation ability of different dry bean genotypes. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2015, 95, 1243–1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Reinprecht, Y.; Schram, L.; Marsolais, F.; Smith, T.H.; Hill, B.; Pauls, K.P. Effects of nitrogen application on nitrogen fixation in common bean production. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lepetit, M.; Brouquisse, R. Control of the rhizobium–legume symbiosis by the plant nitrogen demand is tightly integrated at the whole plant level and requires inter-organ systemic signaling. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 14, 1114840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Goyal, R.K.; Mattoo, A.K.; Schmidt, M.A. Rhizobial–Host Interactions and Symbiotic Nitrogen Fixation in Legume Crops Toward Agriculture Sustainability. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 669404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Edje, O.T.; Ossom, E.M. Crop Science Handbook; Blue Moon Printers: Manzini, Swaziland, 2009; Volume 63, pp. 1–3557. [Google Scholar]
  19. Dlamini, S.T.; Jaiswal, S.K.; Mohammed, M.; Dakora, F.D. Studies of phylogeny, symbiotic functioning and ecological traits of indigenous microsymbionts nodulating bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. Verdc) in Eswatini. Microb. Ecol. 2021, 82, 688–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kunene, T.R.; Masarirambi, M.T.; Wahome, P.K.; Oseni, T.O. Influence of Kraal Manure, Chicken Manure and Inorganic Fertilizer on Growth, Yield and Post-harvest Quality of Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) in a Sub-tropical Environment. Asian J. Adv. Agric. Res. 2019, 11, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Unkovich, M.; Herridge, D.A.V.I.D.; Peoples, M.; Cadisch, G.; Boddey, B.; Giller, K.; Alves, B.; Chalk, P. Measuring Plant-Associated Nitrogen Fixation in Agricultural Systems; Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR): Canberra, Australia, 2008; 258p. [Google Scholar]
  22. Pausch, R.C.; Mulchi, C.L.; Lee, E.H.; Meisinger, J.J. Use of 13C and 15N isotopes to investigate O3 effects on C and N metabolism in soybeans. Part II. Nitrogen uptake, fixation, and partitioning. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1996, 60, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Shearer, G.; Kohl, D.H. Natural 15N enrichment of amide-exporting legume nodules. Physiol. Plant. 1989, 76, 586–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Farquhar, G.D.; Ehleringer, J.R.; Hubick, K.T. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1989, 40, 503–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jaiswal, S.K.; Dakora, F.D. Maximizing Photosynthesis and Plant Growth in African Legumes Through Rhizobial Partnerships. Microorganisms 2025, 13, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mnasri, B.; Aouani, M.E.; Mhamdi, R. Nodulation and growth of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under water deficiency. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2007, 39, 1744–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Peoples, M.B.; Giller, K.E.; Jensen, E.S.; Herridge, D.F. Quantifying country-to-global scale nitrogen fixation for grain legumes: I. Reliance on nitrogen fixation of soybean, groundnut and pulses. Plant Soil 2021, 469, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Habinshuti, S.J.; Maseko, S.T.; Dakora, F.D. Inhibition of N2 fixation by N fertilization of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants grown on fields of farmers in the eastern cape of South Africa, measured Using 15N natural abundance and tissue ureide analysis. Front. Agron. 2021, 3, 692933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ghafoor, A.Z.; Javed, H.H.; Karim, H.; Studnicki, M.; Ali, I.; Yue, H.; Xiao, P.; Asghar, M.A.; Brock, C.; Wu, Y. Biological Nitrogen Fixation for Sustainable Agriculture Development Under Climate Change–New Insights From a Meta-Analysis. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2024, 210, 12754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wilker, J.; Navabi, A.; Rajcan, I.; Marsolais, F.; Hill, B.; Torkamaneh, D.; Pauls, K.P. Agronomic performance and nitrogen fixation of heirloom and conventional dry bean varieties under low-nitrogen field conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Oladzad, A.; González, A.; Macchiavelli, R.; de Jensen, C.E.; Beaver, J.; Porch, T.; McClean, P. Genetic factors associated with nodulation and nitrogen derived from atmosphere in a middle American common bean panel. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 576078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Oteng-Frimpong, R.; Dakora, F.D. Multienvironment testing for trait stability and G × E interaction on N2 Fixation, plant development, and water-use efficiency of 21 elite groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes in the Guinea Savanna. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Taiz, L.; Zeiger, E. Photosynthesis: Physiological and ecological considerations. Plant Physiol. 2002, 9, 172–174. [Google Scholar]
  34. Papathanasiou, F.; Ninou, E.; Mylonas, I.; Baxevanos, D.; Papadopoulou, F.; Avdikos, I.; Sistanis, I.; Koskosidis, A.; Vlachostergios, D.N.; Stefanou, S.; et al. The evaluation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under water stress based on physiological and agronomic parameters. Plants 2022, 11, 2432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Basu, P.S.; Singh, U.; Meena, S.K.; Gurumurthy, S.; Kumar, V.; Tewari, K.; Das, K.; Sharma, K.; Chaturvedi, S.K. Implication of Climate Change on the Productivity of Legumes. In Climate Change and Legumes; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2023; pp. 207–250. [Google Scholar]
  36. Liu, T.T.; Zhai, D.D.; Guan, B.T.; Shi, Z.J. Nitrogen fixation and transformation with main group elements. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2022, 51, 3846–3861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Huang, W. Nitrogen Fixation in Legumes: Genetic Mechanisms and Agricultural Applications. Field Crop 2004, 7, 58–69. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Climatic data recorded during the experimental period at the Malkerns research station, Eswatini (January to May 2024).
Table 1. Climatic data recorded during the experimental period at the Malkerns research station, Eswatini (January to May 2024).
TemperatureRainfall (mm)Relative Humidity
(°C) (%)
2024Max.Min. Max.Min.
January27.917.177.67557
February26.317.3190.88467
March27.418.2168.88163
April28.418.847.47753
May27.218.5124.08350
Mean27.417.9121.728058
Table 2. Reference plants used for estimating δ15N (‰).
Table 2. Reference plants used for estimating δ15N (‰).
Common NameScientific Nameδ15N‰
Star grassCynodon dactylon+3.96
Black jackBidens pilosa+3.49
NutsedgesCyperus rotundus+3.48
broadleaf plantsTrifolium repens+3.17
OxalisOxalis stricta+2.43
AmaranthusAmaranthus retroflexus+2.52
Average +3.175
Table 3. Plant growth and symbiotic performance of 27 common bean genotypes planted at Eswatini, Malkerns research station during 2024 cropping season.
Table 3. Plant growth and symbiotic performance of 27 common bean genotypes planted at Eswatini, Malkerns research station during 2024 cropping season.
GenotypeShoot DMN Concentrationδ15NN ContentNdfaAmount N-FixedSoil N Uptake Grain Yield
g.plant−1%mg.plant−1%kg.ha−1kg.ha−1 kg.ha−1
M-S-15-D-F-117.88 ± 2.55 i2.57 ± 0.16 f0.35 ± 0.31 g–j470.52 ± 78.43 g54.71 ± 5.96 a–d52.28 ± 8.71 g8.87 ± 0.48 i765.62 ± 111.53 k
M-S-16-A-118.37 ± 1.77 h–i3.19 ± 0.09 a–d0.40 ± 0.24 f–j596.49 ± 72.52 e–g53.73 ± 4.61 a–e66.27 ± 8.06 e–g12.98 ± 1.24 f–i1045.57 ± 143.27 h–j
C-S-15-Z-121.40 ± 1.79 g–i2.71 ± 0.16 e–f1.45 ± 0.18 a–c600.91 ± 77.05 e–g33.34 ± 3.42 h–j66.77 ± 8.56 e–g19.09 ± 1.93 e–i678.65 ± 81.85 k
M-S-15-D-E-2222.03 ± 1.71 f–i2.60 ± 0.12 f0.59 ± 0.34 d–i580.12 ± 60.98 f–g50.11 ± 6.61 b–g64.46 ± 6.78 f–g13.04 ± 1.21–i779.95 ± 104.06 k
M-S-15-D-1022.05 ± 0.97 f–i2.58 ± 0.012 f0.09 ± 0.37 h–j576.63 ± 46.68 f–g59.77 ± 7.23 a–c64.07 ± 5.19 f–g10.44 ± 1.25 h–i920.57 ± 87.46 i–k
M-S-16-A-224.66 ± 0.94 e–i2.60 ± 0.15 f0.55 ± 0.25 d–i634.29 ± 26.21 e–g50.82 ± 4.95 b–g70.47 ± 2.91 e–g15.55 ± 1.52 f–i1089.01 ± 129.61 g–j
DAB 21025.05 ± 1.31 e–i2.82 ± 0.10 d–f0.14 ± 0.39 h–j702.29 ± 36.12 d–g58.93 ± 7.50 a–c78.03 ± 4.01 d–g13.85 ± 2.12 f–i1182.09 ± 171.28 e–i
DAB 17425.29 ± 0.93 e–i2.57 ± 0.17 f0.48 ± 0.10 f–i658.69 ± 56.86 e–g52.25 ± 2.04 b–f73.19 ± 6.32 e–g15.47 ± 1.20 f–i850.26 ± 99.87 j–k
PAN 921625.38 ± 1.93 e–i2.72 ± 0.19 e–f–0.202 ± 0.25 i–j703.53 ± 85.56 d–g65.48 ± 4.79 a–b78.17 ± 9.17 d–g11.60 ± 1.82 g–i1042.97 ± 89.37 h–j
M-S-16-A-F-726.98 ± 3.87 d–i2.70 ± 0.10 e–f–0.373 ± 0.19 j709.04 ± 86.00 d–g68.81 ± 3.76 a78.78 ± 9.56 d–g11.63 ± 2.07 g–i1407.55 ± 53.99 b–f
M-Rm-15-F-1728.92 ± 1.32 d–i3.04 ± 0.17 b–e1.19 ± 0.26 b–f863.70 ± 26.28 c–f38.46 ± 5.04 e–i95.97 ± 2.92 b–e26.30 ± 1.88 c–g1512.99 ± 55.78 a–d
M-RM-16-A-D-1629.03 ± 4.17 d–i2.97 ± 0.11 c–f1.56 ± 0.09 a–c885.95 ± 146.93 c–f31.23 ± 1.88 h–j98.44 ± 2.33 c–f31.06 ± 5.77 b–e1239.58 ± 44.78 d–h
NUA 4529.13 ± 0.58 d–i3.06 ± 0.16 b–e0.55 ± 0.15 d–i888.07 ± 42.90 c–f50.92 ± 2.99 b–g98.67 ± 4.76 c–e21.51 ± 1.25 e–i1379.95 ± 33.25 b–f
C-RM-14-A-C-229.68 ± 1.27 d–h3.19 ± 0.08 a–d1.30 ± 0.26 b–d943.33 ± 30.72 b–f36.26 ± 4.99 g–i104.81 ± 3.41 b–f30.44 ± 3.22 b–e1335.93 ± 52.26 c–g
M-RM-F-1832.42 ± 3.37 c–g2.93 ± 0.07 c–f2.18 ± 0.22 a960.91 ± 12.44 b–e19.13 ± 4.29 j106.77 ± 3.05 b–e39.08 ± 5.46 a–d1428.38 ± 39.84 b–f
M-RM-16-A-D-733.12 ± 4.17 c–f3.17 ± 0.24 a–d1.36 ± 0.22 b–d1114.37 ± 19.31 a–c35.07 ± 4.27 g–i123.82 ± 2.03 a–c39.32 ± 8.24 a–d1536.82 ± 32.31 a–c
M-RM-15-F-E-633.33 ± 2.33 c–f2.57 ± 0.11 f1.29 ± 0.22 b–d843.004 ± 35.69 d–g36.41 ± 4.29 g–i93.67 ± 3.97 c–g27.22 ± 2.82 c–f1337.23 ± 77.45 c–g
M-RM-16-D-F-1133.40 ± 3.68 c–f3.14 ± 0.13 a–e0.38 ± 0.19 f–j1038.69 ± 10.64 a–d54.15 ± 3.65 a–e115.41 ± 1.63 a–d24.68 ± 4.09 d–h1627.60 ± 80.42 a–b
M-RM-15-F-633.94 ± 2.40 c–e3.13 ± 0.11 a–e1.57 ± 0.16 a–c1054.02 ± 67.75 a–d31.11 ± 3.09 h–j117.11 ± 7.53 a–d37.05 ± 3.65 a–d1648.52 ± 55.03 a–b
Cim-Rm-14-Als6134.38 ± 3.08 c–e3.50 ± 0.12 a1.48 ± 0.33 b–c1210.95 ± 13.86 a–c32.85 ± 6.49 h–j134.55 ± 4.32 a–c43.66 ± 8.44 a–b1294.26 ± 74.04 d–h
C-RM-14-A-8734.54 ± 7.14 c–e3.32 ± 0.06 a–c1.18 ± 0.14 b–f1137.66 ± 24.38 a–c38.75 ± 2.71 e–i126.41 ± 3.26 a–c33.87 ± 6.98 b–e1152.34 ± 30.10 f–i
Mwctz20A-Rm-435.82 ± 3.61 b–e3.06 ± 0.05 b–e1.22 ± 0.10 b–e1107.17 ± 12.91 a–c37.86 ± 1.98 f–i123.01 ± 1.65 a–c33.85 ± 3.48 a–d1747.39 ± 36.51 a
C-RM-14-A-C-2737.38 ± 3.23 a–d3.46 ± 0.16 a–b1.79 ± 0.39 ab1301.36 ± 14.36 a–b26.63 ± 7.67 i–j144.59 ± 5.93 a–b50.58 ± 9.14 a1458.33 ± 88.36 b–e
M-RM-15-D-A-2142.54 ± 7.70 a–c2.76 ± 0.08 d–f0.62 ± 0.24 d–h1153.43 ± 20.59 a–c49.48 ± 4.65 c–g128.16 ± 2.39 a–c32.10 ± 7.49 b–e1420.56 ± 103.03 b–f
Mwctz20a-Rm1945.39 ± 3.31 a–b3.12 ± 0.12 a–e0.85 ± 0.18 c–h1401.57 ± 85.86 a45.07 ± 3.42 c–h155.73 ± 9.54 a37.95 ± 2.34 a–d1347.66 ± 55.77 c–f
Cim-Rm-3647.43 ± 6.01 a2.79 ± 0.10 d–f1.03 ± 0.19 b–g1336.64 ± 18.36 a41.56 ± 3.87 d–i148.52 ± 20.48 a41.58 ± 8.09 a–c1433.59 ± 29.66 b–e
F-statistics4.942 ***4.77 ***6.855 ***5.643 ***6.855 ***5.643 ***6.9827 ***11.865 **
Means followed by dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Where ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001.
Table 4. Comparison of dry matter yield, %C, C content, C/N ratio and δ13C of common bean genotypes planted in the field of Malkerns research station, Eswatini.
Table 4. Comparison of dry matter yield, %C, C content, C/N ratio and δ13C of common bean genotypes planted in the field of Malkerns research station, Eswatini.
GenotypeShoot DMC ConcentrationC Contentδ13CC:N Ratio
g.plant−1%mg.plant−1g.g−1
M-S-15-D-F-117.88 ± 2.55 i40.21 ± 0.30 a–e715.75 ± 98.56 i−29.84 ± 0.22 a15.67 ± 0.92 a–c
M-S-16-A-118.38 ± 1.77 h–i39.66 ± 0.35 d–f724.91 ± 64.31 i−21.64 ± 6.29 a15.49 ± 1.36 a–d
C-S-15-Z-121.4 ± 1.79 g–i39.63 ± 0.16 d–f848.04 ± 71.09 h–i−22.28 ± 6.29 a13.93 ± 0.46 c–g
M-S-15-D-E-2222.03 ± 1.71 f–i39.44 ± 0.37 d–f870.20 ± 70.07 g–i−28.68 ± 0.18 a16.45 ± 1.12 a
M-S-15-D-1022.05 ± 0.96 f–i40.97 ± 0.19 a–b903.25 ± 39.35 f–i−29.07 ± 0.19 a14.35 ± 0.24 a–f
M-S-16-A-224.67 ± 0.94 e–i40.18 ± 0.22 a–f991.74 ± 39.75 e–i−28.78 ± 0.29 a14.68 ± 0.76 a–e
DAB 21025.05 ± 1.31 e–i40.48 ± 0.48 a–d1016.12 ± 59.19 d–i−28.18 ± 0.36 a14.96 ± 1.09 a–e
DAB 17425.29 ± 0.93 e–i40.24 ± 0.25 a–e1019.12 ± 41.72 d–i−28.77 ± 0.12 a15.09 ± 0.67 a–e
PAN 921625.38 ± 1.93 e–i41.15 ± 0.63 a1048.88 ± 86.86 d–i−29.29 ± 0.10 a14.89 ± 0.68 a–e
M-S-16-A-F-726.98 ± 3.87 d–i39.48 ± 0.77 d–f1070.54 ± 160.86 d–i−28.87 ± 0.21 a16.17 ± 1.12 a–b
M-Rm-15-F-1728.91 ± 1.32 d–i39.61 ± 0.19 d–f1145.34 ± 52.72 d–i−28.50 ± 0.35 a13.38 ± 0.80 c–g
M-RM-16-A-D-1629.03 ± 4.17 d–i39.59 ± 0.19 d–f1149.02 ± 164.66 d–i−27.98 ± 0.32 a13.46 ± 0.54 c–g
NUA 4529.13 ± 0.58 d–i39.79 ± 0.19 c–f1158.66 ± 21.34 d–i−27.51 ± 0.16 a13.39 ± 0.74 c–g
C-RM-14-A-C-229.68 ± 1.27 d–g40.29 ± 0.33 a–e1197.60 ± 57.09 d–h−22.29 ± 6.27 a12.68 ± 0.37 e–g
M-RM-F-1832.42 ± 3.37 c–g39.32 ± 0.28 e–f1277.97 ± 136.82 d–h−28.86 ± 0.15 a13.52 ± 0.36 c–g
M-RM-16-A-D-733.12 ± 4.72 c–f40.06 ± 0.22 a–f1325.73 ± 188.57 c–g−28.26 ± 0.24 a13.34 ± 1.19 c–g
M-RM-15-F-E-633.33 ± 2.33 c–f39.08 ± 0.28 f1303.55 ± 93.56 d–h−28.98 ± 0.09 a15.37 ± 0.68 a–d
M-RM-16-D-F-1133.40 ± 3.68 c–f39.70 ± 0.24 c–f1326.31 ± 145.51 c–g−22.43 ± 6.30 a12.84 ± 0.52 e–g
M-RM-15-F-633.94 ± 2.40 c–e39.77 ± 0.16 c–f1349.27 ± 94.61 c–f−27.74 ± 0.27 a12.84 ± 0.46 e–g
Cim-Rm-14-Als6134.38 ± 3.09 c–e40.13 ± 0.27 a–f1377.29 ± 120.78 b–f−27.38 ± 0.27 a11.54 ± 0.39 g
C-RM-14-A-8734.55 ± 7.15 c–e40.01 ± 0.27 b–f1385.68 ± 287.15 b–e−27.22 ± 0.21 a12.11 ± 0.21 f–g
Mwctz20a-Rm-435.83 ± 3.61 b–e39.99 ± 0.29 b–f1428.96 ± 139.97 b–e−28.42 ± 0.14 a13.09 ± 0.25 d–g
C-RM-14-A-C-2737.37 ± 3.23 a–d39.68 ± 0.32 d–f1482.79 ± 127.70 b–d−28.07 ± 0.21 a11.66 ± 0.58 g
M-RM-15-D-A-2142.54 ± 7.70 a–c40.81 ± 0.29 a–c1736.79 ± 315.89 a–c−29.42 ± 0.09 a12.77 ± 0.49 e–g
Mwctz20a-Rm1945.40 ± 3.31 a–b39.44 ± 0.14 d–f1791.09 ± 131.02 a–b−27.99 ± 0.19 a12.77 ± 0.49 e–g
Cim-Rm-3647.43 ± 6.01 a40.53 ± 0.26 a–d1927.07 ± 249.11 a−28.52 ± 0.25 a14.65 ± 0.48 a–e
F-statistics4.942 ***2.5 ***4.883 ***0.943 ns3.564 ***
Means followed by dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Where *** p ≤ 0.001 and ns means not significant.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Maripa, M.R.; Ngmenzuma, T.Y.; Dakora, F.D. Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini. Biol. Life Sci. Forum 2026, 57, 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/blsf2026057004

AMA Style

Maripa MR, Ngmenzuma TY, Dakora FD. Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini. Biology and Life Sciences Forum. 2026; 57(1):4. https://doi.org/10.3390/blsf2026057004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Maripa, Mahlodi R., Titus Y. Ngmenzuma, and Felix D. Dakora. 2026. "Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini" Biology and Life Sciences Forum 57, no. 1: 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/blsf2026057004

APA Style

Maripa, M. R., Ngmenzuma, T. Y., & Dakora, F. D. (2026). Selecting 27 Field-Grown Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes for Symbiotic Performance and Drought Tolerance at Malkerns Research Station, Eswatini. Biology and Life Sciences Forum, 57(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/blsf2026057004

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop