You are here
Yield of shell bean depending on cultivar type and technological purpose under the conditions of the Right-Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine
The absence of clear standardization of vegetable bean varieties in Ukraine according to their technological purpose complicates the scientifically grounded selection of cultivars for different areas of use. Of particular relevance is the differentiation between snap (asparagus) and shell (flageolet) varietal types, taking into account their productive potential under specific soil and climatic conditions. The research was conducted in 2024–2025 at the experimental fields of the Department of Crop Production of Uman National University of Horticulture under the conditions of the Right-Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine. The yield of pods, flageolet (immature seeds), and dry grain was determined. The analysis of the results revealed a significant differentiation among varieties in terms of productivity. Among vegetable varieties, the highest pod yield was obtained from Berggold (29.12 t/ha) and Supernano Giallo (25.22 t/ha), exceeding the standard by 159 % and 124 %, respectively. The flageolet yield of these varieties reached 14.12 t/ha (Supernano Giallo) and 13.03 t/ha (Berggold). In the flageolet varietal group, the highest production of immature seeds was recorded for the variety Elsa (15.48 t/ha). The average yield across the sample amounted to 19.56 t/ha for pods, 11.16 t/ha for flageolet, and 3.39 t/ha for dry grain. The analysis of the ratio between the mass of flageolet and pod valves showed that in the selected vegetable bean varieties (Topcrop, Berggold, Supernano Giallo), the proportion of immature seeds and pod valves was nearly equal (approximately 50:50), which brings them closer in pod morphological structure to universal-type varieties. In contrast, classical flageolet-type varieties were characterized by a predominance of immature seeds, reaching 73 %, while the proportion of pod valves decreased to 27 %, indicating their clear genetic orientation toward the formation of productive immature seeds. Thus, the increased flageolet yield in Topcrop, Berggold, and Supernano Giallo is mainly due to the overall high level of pod biomass, particularly the development of fleshy valves, rather than a specialized orientation toward the accumulation of immature seeds.
Key words: Phaseolus vulgaris, cultivar type, pod yield, flageolet, grain.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2989-0564Reference:
1. Celebioglu, B., Roy, J., Farmer, A., English, S., Yu, X., Xu, X., McClean, P. E., Gepts, P., Parker, T. (2025). A domestication change at PvMYB26 in common bean sheds light on the origins of Middle American agriculture. bioRxiv preprint. DOI: 10.1101/2025.05.15.654381.
2. Swamy, K.R.M. (2023). Origin, domestication, taxonomy, botanical description, genetics and cytogenetics, genetic diversity and breeding of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). International Journal of Current Research. Vol. 15, pp. 24766–24795.
3. Pesqueira, A.M., González, A.M., BarragánLozano, T., Arnedo, M.S., Lozano, R., Santalla, M. (2025). Insights into the Genetics Underlying the Resistance to Root-Knot Nematode Reproduction in the Common Bean Ouro Negro. Plants. no. 14(7), 1073 p. DOI: 10.3390/plants14071073.
4. Kris, H.K. (2020). The domestication of the common bean. ThoughtCo. Available at: https:// www.thoughtco.com/domestication-of-the-common-bean-170080.
5. Nadeem, M.A., Yeken, M.Z., Shahid, M.Q., Habyarimana, E., Yılmaz, H., Alsaleh, A. (2021). Common bean as a potential crop for future food security: An overview of past, current and future contributions in genomics, transcriptomics, transgenics and proteomics. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment. Vol. 35, pp. 759–787.
6. Fawzy, Z.F., El-Ramady, H., Azab, M.A. (2023). Can foliar application of natural biostimulants reduce nitrate and fiber content in fresh green bean under soil nutrient deficiency? Bulletin of the National Research Centre. Vol. 47, Art. 165. DOI: 10.1186/s42269-023-01135-5.
7. El Sheikha, A.F., Allam, A.Y., Taha, M., Varzakas, T. (2022). How does the addition of biostimulants affect the growth, yield, and quality parameters of the snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)? Applied Sciences. Vol. 12, Art. 776. DOI: 10.3390/app12020776.
8. Britannica. Common bean | Description, varieties, origin, & facts. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2023. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/ plant/common-bean.
9. Panchyshyn, V., Moisiienko, V., Stotska, S., Derebon, I., Bohatyrchuk, T. (2023). Yield of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) depending on variety and fertilization. Modern Engineering and Innovative Technologies. Vol. 4(26-04), pp. 110–114. DOI: 10.30890/2567-5273.2023-26-04-057.
10. Aghora, T.S., Thangam, M., Patil, N. (2023). Legume vegetables for human nutrition and entrepreneurship. Vegetables for Nutrition and Entrepreneurship. Singapore, Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-19- 9016-8_20.
11. De Paiva Gouvêa, L., Caldeira, R.F., Azevedo, T.D.L., Antoniassi, R., Galdeano, M.C., Felberg, I., Lima, J.R., Mellinger, C.G. (2024). Nutritional properties of common bean protein concentrate compared to commercial legume ingredients for the plant-based market. Current Research in Food Science. Vol. 9, Art. 100937. DOI: 10.1016/j. crfs.2024.100937.
12. Sundarakani, B., Ghouse, A. (2024). A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of blockchain technology for food security. Foods. Vol. 13, Art. 3607.
13. Silva, J.H.B. da, Silva, D.M. de A., Silva, K.M. (2023). Agronomic methods aiming quality and production increase in bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L.): An integrative review. Scientific Electronic Archives. Vol. 16(12). DOI: 10.36560/161220231816.
14. Njau, S.N., Parker, T.A., Duitama, J., Gepts, P., Arunga, E.E. (2024). QTL mapping for pod quality and yield traits in snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Frontiers in Plant Science. no. 15, 1422957. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1422957.
15. Sofi, P.A., Shafi, S., Fatima, S., Rani, S., Ahmad, R., Banoo, A., Jha, P. (2022). Characterization of Western Himalayan small-seeded red beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) for yield, quality and resilience. Plant Genetic Resources. Vol. 20(5), pp. 337–347. DOI: 10.1017/S1479262123000230.
16. Yatsenko, V., Poltoretskiy, S., Yatsenko, N., Poltoretska, N., Mazur, O. (2023). Agrobiological assessment of green bean varieties by adaptability, productivity, and nitrogen fixation. Scientific Horizons. Vol. 26(7), pp. 79–94. DOI: 10.48077/scihor7.2023.79.
17. Campos, K., Schwember, A.R., Machado, D., Ozores-Hampton, M., Gil, P.M. (2021). Physiological and yield responses of green-shelled beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown under restricted irrigation. Agronomy. Vol. 11, Art. 562. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy11030562.
18. Hernández-Figueroa, K.I., Sánchez-Chávez, E., Ojeda-Barrios, D.L., Chávez-Mendoza, C., Muñoz-Márquez, E., Palacio-Márquez, A. (2022). Effectiveness of the application of biostimulants in snap bean under water stress. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas. Vol. 13, pp. 149–160. DOI: 10.29312/remexca.v13i28.3270.
19. Abebe, A., Tsige, A., Work, M., Enyew, A. (2020). Optimizing irrigation frequency and amount on yield and water productivity of snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in NW Amhara, Ethiopia. Cogent Food & Agriculture. Vol. 6, Art. 1773690. DOI: 10.1080/23311932.2020.1773690.
20. Dhakal, R., Bhardwaj, H. (2024). Alternative Use of Black and Navy Beans as Green Shell Beans. HortScience. no. 59(6), pp. 831–832. DOI: 10.21273/ HORTSCI17827-24.
21. Bala, R.A., Fagam, A.S., Garba, A.A. (2022). Growth, phenology and yield response of green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to various sowing dates and nutrient sources in Bauchi State, Nigeria. Journal of Horticultural Science and Research. Vol. 5(1), pp. 200–208. Available at: https://scholars.direct/Articles/horticulture/jhsr-5-026.pdf.
22. Geleta, R.J., Roro, A.G., Terfa, M.T. (2024). Phenotypic and yield responses of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties to different soil moisture levels. BMC Plant Biology. Vol. 24, Art. 242. DOI: 10.1186/s12870-024-04856-5.
23. DSTU EЭK OON FFV-06:2007. Kvasolja. Nastanovy shhodo postachannja i kontroljuvannja jakosti. Nacional'nyj standart Ukrai'ny [DSTU UNECE FFV-06:2007 Beans. Guidelines for supply and quality control. National Standard of Ukraine]. Kyiv, DP “UkrNDNTs”, 2007, 24 p.
24. DSTU 4138–2002. Nasinnja sil's'kogospodars'kyh kul'tur. Metody vyznachennja jakosti: [DSTU 4138–2002. Seeds of agricultural crops. Methods for quality determination]. Kyiv, Derzhstandart of Ukraine, 2003, 173 p.
25. Bondarenko, G.L., Yakovenko, K.I. (2001). Metodyka doslidnoyi spravy v ovochivnytstvi i bashtannytstv [Methodology of experimental research in vegetable growing and melons]. Kharkiv, Osnova, 369 p.
26. Pramanik, K., Sahu, G.S., Acharya, G.C., Tripathy, P., Dash, M., Koundinya, A.V.V., Jena, C., Kumar, D.S., Mohapatra, P.P., Pradhan, J., Karubakee, S., Moharana, D.P. (2024). Estimating phenotypic stability for relevant yield and quality traits in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) using AMMI analysis. Heliyon. no. 10(5), e26918. DOI: 10.1016/j. heliyon.2024.e26918
27. Oliveira, R.L., Muniz, J.A., Andrade, M.J.B., Reis, R.L. (2009). Precisão experimental em ensaios com a cultura do feijão. Ciência e Agrotecnologia. Vol. 33, pp. 113–119.
28. Porcher, M.H. (2005). Introducing flageolet beans. Multilingual Multiscript Plant Name Database. The University of Melbourne. Available at: https://www.plantnames.unimelb.edu.au/Sorting/Flageolet.html.
29. Ron, A.M., Ferreyra, M., Menéndez-Sevillano, M.C., Ibarra, L., Anta, G.G., Perrig, D., Rodiño, P., Bedmar, E.J. (2017). Diversity and conservation of wild and primitive common bean germplasm and their associated rhizobia in the Andean region. Legumes for Global Food Security. Nova Science Publishers.
30. Redden, R.J., Delacy, I.H., Butler, D.G., Usher, T. (2000). Analysis of line × environment interactions for yield in navy beans. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. Vol. 51(5), pp. 607–617.
31. Girgel, Ü. (2025). System-specific determinants of seed yield in common bean: Insights from conventional and organic path analyses. Legume Research – An International Journal. Advance online publication. DOI: 10.18805/LRF-893.
32. Faria, L.C., Del Peloso, M.J., Melo, L.C. (2005). Potencial de rendimento da cultura do feijoeiro comum; base genética da produtividade de grãos do feijoeiro comum no Brasil e no mundo. Santo Antônio de Goiás, EMBRAPA, pp. 64–65.
33. Londero, P.M.G., Ribeiro, N.D., Cargnelutti Filho, A., Rodrigues, J.A., Antunes, I.F. (2006). Herança dos teores de fibra alimentar e rendimento de grãos em populações de feijoeiro. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. Vol. 41(1), pp. 51–58.
34. Backes, R.L., Tavares, E., Hemp, S., Nicknich, W. (2005). Adaptabilidade e estabilidade de genótipos de feijoeiro no estado de Santa Catarina. Acta Scientiarum Agronomy. Vol. 27(2), pp. 309–314.
35. Melo, L.C., Faria, L.C., Del Peloso, M.J., Costa, J.G.C., Rava, C.A., Lemes, G.C., Cabrera Diaz, J.L., Abreu, A.F.B., Zimmermann, F.J.P. (2005). Adaptabilidade e estabilidade de produção da cultivar BRS Supremo em diferentes regiões brasileiras. Comunicado Técnico. no. 104, 4 p.
36. Celmeli, T., Sari, H., Canci, H., Sari, D., Adak, A., Eker, T., Toker, C. (2018). The nutritional content of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces in comparison to modern varieties. Agronomy. Vol. 8(9), Art. 166. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy8090166.
Download this article:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 uatsenko_1-2026.pdf | 758.58 KB |
YEAR: