Full Length Research Paper

EVALUATION OF FABA BEANS (Vicia faba L.) VARIETIES AGAINST

CHOCOLATE SPOT (Botrytis fabae SARD.) DISEASE IN HORRO
GUDURU WOLLEGA ZONE, WESTERN ETHIOPIA
Fikiru Wakoya1 Tola Abdissa1 Alemayehu Dugasa1

Department of Plant Science, College of Agriculture and Natural Resource,

Wollega University Shambu Campus, P. O. Box 38, Shambu, Ethiopia.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................................................................i
TABLE OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................................................i
FIGURE OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................................i
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................................i
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
2. MATERIAL AND METHODS..................................................................................................................1
2.1. Site Description............................................................................................................................1
2.2. Treatments and Experimental Design..........................................................................................1
2.3. Data Collection............................................................................................................................1
2.3.1. Disease Assessment.............................................................................................................1
2.4. Data analysis................................................................................................................................1
3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................1
3.1. Disease severity and incidence....................................................................................................1
3.2. AUDPC and PSI.............................................................................................................................1
4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENNDATION..........................................................................................1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................................................1
5. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................1

2
 TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Disease Progress curve (DPC) for chocolate spot diseases (Botrytis fabae) of faba bean (Vicia
faba) varieties at Guduru site.......................................................................................................................1
Figure 2. Disease Progress curve (DPC) for chocolate spot diseases (Botrytis fabae) of faba bean (Vicia
faba) varieties at Shambu site......................................................................................................................1

3
 FIGURE OF TABLES

Table 1. Chocolate spot disease (Botrytis fabae) incidence and Severity of faba beans (Vicia faba)
varieties at Shambu and Guduru Site in main growing season....................................................................1
Table 2. Area under disease progress curve (AUDPC) and Percent severity index (PSI) of chocolate spot
disease (Botrytis fabae) at Guduru and Shambu sites in main growing season............................................1

4
ABSTRACT
Chocolate spot (Botrytis fabae Sard.) is one of the major diseases threatening faba
bean (Vicia faba L.) production and limiting its productivity in Ethiopia. The yield losses
reach up to 100% on susceptible cultivars. Although a number of faba bean varieties
with good yield potential have been releasing, their reaction to this major disease and
yield performance are little understanding in western Ethiopia. Thus, chocolate spot
disease severity, incidence, AUDPC and PSI on 14 improved faba bean varieties and
one local cultivar were tested under natural infections at Guduru and Shambu research
site in Horro Guduru Wollega zone of western Ethiopia. The experimental site was
located at longitude 36o39’28.8”-37o40’11.2”E and latitude 9o9’24.6”-10o20’59.9”N,
altitudes range from 1500-2450m, annual range of rainfall 900mm-2000mm and
temperature range from 15 oC -25 oC. The field experiments consisted of 15 treatments
(14 varieties and a local cultivar) are laid out in a randomized complete block design
(RCBD) with three replications during the 2016/17 main cropping season. The onset
and progress of chocolate spot disease severity, incidence, AUDPC and PSI were
assessed with a 1-9 scale. The varieties varied significantly (P < 0.05) in disease
severity, incidence, AUDPC and PSI. Gora, Holeta-02, Bulga-70 and Degaga varieties
were exhibited moderate to lower resistance to chocolate spot disease, whereas,
Mesay, local cultivar and Kasa varieties were highly susceptible to chocolate spot
disease. This study indicated that improved faba bean varieties reacted differently to
chocolate spot disease.

Key words: Chocolate Spot, Faba Bean, PSI, AUDPC, Disease Severity, Disease Incidence

1.

5
 1. INTRODUCTION
Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) also referred to as broad bean, horse bean and sometimes field bean
occupies nearly 3.2 million hectare worldwide (Torres et al., 2006). Faba bean production in the
world is concentrated in nine major agro-ecological regions: The Mediterranean Basin, the Nile
Valley, Ethiopia, Central Asia, East Asia, Oceania, Latin America, Northern Europe and North
America (Bond et al., 1985). In 2003, the worldwide production was 2.6 million metric tons
(Mt); China leads the world in faba bean production in both area coverage and production. Other
major production areas are Ethiopia (0.37 million ha, 0.45 Mt), Egypt (0.14 million ha, 0.44 Mt)
and Australia (0.16 million ha, 0.27 Mt) (FAOSTAT, 2010). In Europe, faba bean is the second
legume crop in area and production, after pea. Europe accounts for 14% of the world area (0.37
million ha) and about 25% of world production (1.2 Mt) (Torres et al., 2006). ).

In Ethiopia, faba bean is grown in the highlands (1800-3000 m.a.s.l) where the need for cold
temperature is met (Yohannes, 2000). It is believed that the crop was introduced to Ethiopia from
the Middle East via Egypt around 5000 B.C., immediately after domestication (Asfaw et al.,
1994). Ethiopia is now considered as one of the centers of secondary diversity for faba bean
(Asfaw et al., 1994; Yohannes, 2000 Torres et al., 2006). Currently the crop is grown in several
regions of the country receiving annual rainfall of 700-1000 mm (ICARDA, 2006). Production in
Ethiopia is totally rain-fed on nitosols and cambisol type of soils (Gemechu et al., 2002) Amhara
and Oromiya are the two major pulse-producing regions in Ethiopia. The Amhara Region has
the largest pulse area (43.7%) and contributes to the highest production (47%) in the country
followed by Oromiya Region that has 38% of the area and contributes 39% to national
production (CSA, 2006).

Faba bean has an important place in the Ethiopia national dietary and is consumed in various
forms. In other parts of the world, the green immature beans are boiled and eaten as vegetable.
The mature seeds may be used for feeding livestock such as swine, equine, and poultry while
stalks or haulms may be used as feed for other animals. The stalks are also used as firewood for
cooking. The contribution of faba bean in improving soil fertility is well documented. The crop
can be grown for green manure and silage. The chocolate Spot disease is characterized by
initially appears as reddish brown spots on leaves, which enlarge and even merge and

6
subsequently lead to sever premature defoliation. Under favorable conditions, it appears on
stems, flowers and pods, which directly affect seed production.

Faba bean is an important legume crop and pre-dominantly grown by every individual farmers in
the Woreda. However, there are different fababean production constraints that limit the
production and productivity of the crop. Chocolate spot disease caused by Botrytis fabae Sard. is
the major and the most widespread and destructive disease wherever fababean is grown. In
Ethiopia the yield reducing capacity of the disease exceeds up to 61% on susceptible cultivars
(Dereje and Beniwal, 1987, Samuel, et al., 2008). The relative importance of aerial fungal
diseases and their effect on yield varies among years and cropping area. However, some of them
affect large areas in all the countries where faba bean is cultivated and cause considerable losses
in quality and quantity of the products. While informal observation have been done in some
there where found that the whole fababean crops grown in the area infected by the disease and
show necrotic symptoms. Hence, this needs more attention in all surveyed areas and finds
solution for farmers to sustain their life with producing fababean crops (Personnel
communication and observation).

In Ethiopia, growing of moderately resistant variety, application of chlorothalonil or

mancozeb and late planting has been recommended for chocolate spot management (Dereje,
1999; Samuel et al., 2008). However, in Ethiopia, there is no research evidence on the
control of chocolate spot by cultural practices, crop rotation may help in reducing the
initial inoculum and thus the disease incidence (Habtu and Dereje, 1985). Despite a general
recommendation on crop rotation and field hygiene for control of chocolate spot, no
supporting evidence for these has been produced yet (Harrison, 1988). Variety screening is
most promising methods of disease management strategies which is environmentally sound, cost
effective and pesticide free. Therefore, searching efficient means for controlling the foliar
diseases is so urgent for improving faba bean yield and its components. Due to this reason
selection of resistant varieties to foliar diseases is the appropriate means to increase the yield of
the crop. Thus, this work in line with evaluating and adaptation of released varieties against
chocolate spot disease having with the following specific objectives:
 To assess the response of faba bean varieties to chocolate spot diseases
 To select the promising varieties of faba bean for the study area

7
 2. MATERIAL AND METHODS
2.1. Site Description

Horro Guduru Wollega Zone is found in Oromia National Regional State, at location of
longitude 36o39’28.8”-37o40’11.2”E and latitude 9o9’24.6”-10o 20’59.9”N, temperature 8-32oC,
annual rainfall 900mm-2000mm and altitude 1350-3170m a.s.l. where the experiment was
conducted at two sites (Shambu and Guduru) during 2016/17 main cropping season.

a. Treatments and Experimental Design

The experiments were conducted in 2016/17 during main cropping season at Guduru and
Shambu sites, Horro Guduru Wollega Zone, western Ethiopia at experimental sites. The
treatments were evaluated with 14 faba bean released varieties and local check. The varieties
were obtained from Holeta and Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center. The plot size was 2m x
2m having 6-seedling rows 1m spacing between blocks and 0.5m and 0.3m spacing between
plots and rows, respectively. The seed and fertilizer rate were based on standard seed rate
(30kg/ha or 160lb/acre) and DAP 75-90kg/ha and UREA 30kg/ha, respectively. The treatments
were arranged in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications.

b. Data Collection

i. Disease Assessment

Disease severity was assessed as a visual estimation of the percentage of the total plant surface
covered with chocolate spot lesions. Assessments were started as soon as the first chocolate spot
symptoms occurred in every one fifteen day’s interval. Disease severity was rated by using 1-9
rating scale (Bernier et al.,1993), where 1= no disease symptoms or very small specks; 3= few
small discrete lesions; 5= some coalesced lesions with some defoliation; 7= large coalesced
sporulating lesions, 50% defoliation and some dead plant; and 9= Extensive lesions on leaves,
stems and pods, severe defoliation, heavy sporulation, stem girdling, blackening and death of
more than 80% of plants (ICARDA, 1986; Hanounik, 1986), the disease severity scores was
converted in to Percentage severity index (PSI) for analysis using the following formula.

nxv
Disease severity= ∗100
9N

8
Where:
n = Number of plants in each category.
v = Numerical values of symptoms category.
N = Total number of plants.
9 = Maximum numerical value of symptom category

The disease was scored at fifteen days intervals starting from the first chocolate spot symptom
appearance and continued until the final podding stage when the disease attained maximum
(Sahile et al., 2008; Villegas–Fernandez et al., 2012). Finally, the scores were converted into
disease severity index (PSI) for the analysis (Hanounik, 1986; Ayman et al., 2009; Abo-Hegazy
et al., 2012). Based on PSI values, the response of tested varieties were classified into six
reaction groups following Abo-Hegazy et al. (2012); where 0 – 2% is highly resistant (HR), >2 –
15% resistant (R), >15 – 40% moderately resistant (MR), >40 – 60% is moderately susceptible
(MS) and >60 – 80% is susceptible (S) >80 – 100% highly susceptible (HS).

PSI =
∑ of numericalratings x 100
No . of plants scored x maximum score on scale

The progress of chocolate spot was plotted over time using mean severity indices for each faba
bean variety at each location, and the PSI values were also used for the two important
epidemiological analyses, namely, area under disease progress curve (AUDPC).

x + x )( t
n
AUDPC=∑ [0. 5( i i+1 i+1 −t i )]
i−1
Where:
Xi= the average coefficient of infection of the i th note, Xi+1 = the average coefficient of
infection of the i+1th note and, ti+1- ti= the number of days between the i th note and the
i+1th note, n= number of observations.

9
 c. Data analysis

The collected data from experimental sites were subjected to analysis of variance with SAS
computer software version 9.1.3 (SAS, 2008). Means were compared with Least Significance
Difference (LSD) at 5% probability level.

10
3. Results

3.1.1. Disease severity

The mean disease severity in both years of 2016 and 2017 was significantly different (P<0.05) at
Shambu and Gudru both experimental site. From statistical analysis at Shambu experimental site
the disease severity was highly significant different (P<0.05) among the varieties in both 2016
and 2017 main cropping season. In this location the highest mean disease severity, was recorded
from Mesay and Moti 48.33% and 43.33%, respectively while, the lowest disease severity was
recorded from FB Didia and Degaga varieties 30.67% and 31.33%, respectively in 2016 main
growing season (Table 2). In this area about nine varieties were highly infected as compared to
local cultivar 35.33%. In 2017 growing season, the highest mean disease severity was recorded
from Obse, Moti and Gora varieties 46% similar value, while, minimum disease severity was
recorded from Dosha and Kasa varieties 28% and 29.67, respectively (Table 2). In this area,
about ten varieties were highly infected as compared to local cultivar 31.33%..

The mean disease severity at Guduru experimental site in both 2016 and 2017 growing season,
was significantly different (P<0.05) (Table 3). In 2016 main growing season the highest disease
severity, was recorded from Obse and Hacalu varieties 43.67% and 41.33%, respectively, while,
the minimum mean disease severity, was recorded from Kasa and Bulga-70 varieties 33%and
34% , respectively (Table 3). In 2017 main growing season the maximum disease severity was
recorded from Tumsa and Dosha varieties both 40.67% , whereas, the minimum was from Gora
and Mesay varieties 30.67% (Table 3). The interaction of both location and years, was not
presented under this experiment because of from the combine analysis data the error variances
were not homogenized and the mean was not significance different among the varieties.

3.2. PSI

The mean percent severity index in both two cropping seasons was significantly different
(P<0.05) among the varieties at Shambu experimental site (Table 2). In fact, in 2016 main
growing season the mean PSI was less significance different, but in 2017 highly significance
different among the varieties (P<0.05). In 2016 main growing season at Shambu experimental
site, the highest PSI was recorded from Mesay and Kasa varieties 65% and 61%, respectively,
while, the lowest PSI was recorded from FB Didia and Degaga varieties 34% and 39%,

11
respectively (Table 2). In year of 2017 main growing season, the highest PSI was calculated from
Obse and Moti varieties 73.81% and 60.62%, respectively while, the minimum PSI was
calculated on Dosha and Local cultivar 27.33% and 38.33%, respectively (Table 2).

At Guduru experimental site the mean of PSI was less significant different among the varieties
((P<0.05) in both 2016 and 2017 cropping season (Table 3). In 2016 year, the highest PSI was
calculated on Obse and Holeta-02 varieties 52.86%, while, the minimum PSI was on Kasa and
CS20DK varieties 35.33% and 39%, respectively (Table 3). In 2017 cropping season the highest
PSI was calculated on Tumsa and Dosha varieties 56.24% and 50.33%, respectively, whereas, the
minimum PSI was on Degaga and Gora varieties 27.33% 31%, respectively (Table 3).

3.3. AUDPC

Statistically, there was highly significant difference (p<0.05) for the area under disease
progressive curve (AUDPC) among the varieties at Shambu experimental site in both 2016 and
2017 main cropping season (Table 2). In 2016 year, the maximum AUDPC was calculated
Mesay and Moti varieties 3125 and 2775, respectively, while the minimum AUDPC was on FB
Didia and Degaga varieties 1937.5 and 1962.5, respectively (Table 2). In year 2017 main
growing season, the highest of AUDPC was computed on Obse, Moti and Gora varieties 2962.5,
while, minimum AUDPC was computed on Dosha and Kasa varieties 1762.5 and 1887.5,
respectively (Table 2).

Statistical result shows, there was significance different (p<0.05) among the varieties in both
2016 and 2017 at Guduru experimental site (Table 3). In 2016 year the maximum mean AUDPC,
was computed on Obse and Hacalu varieties 2800 and 2650, respectively, whereas, the minimum
mean AUDPC was on Kasa and Bulga-70 varieties 2087.5 and 2162.5, respectively. In 2017
cropping season the maximum mean AUDPC, was computed on Tumsa and Dosha varieties
2625 and 2612.5, respectively, while the minimum AUDPC, was computed on Gora and
Hacaluvarieties 1937.5 and 1950, respectively (Table 3).

12
Table 2. Chocolate spot disease (Botrytis fabae) faba beans (Vicia faba) varieties at Shambu Site
in main growing season

Shambu
Varietie
2016 2017
s
DS PSI AUDPC DS PSI AUDPC
55.95ba
Mesay 48.33a 65a 3125a 43bac c 2775ba
Moti 43.33ba 57.52bdac 2775ba 46a 60.62ba 2962.5a
Kasa 43ba 61.91ba 2737.5ba 29.67e 34.67ed 1887.5d
51.91ebdac
Tumsa 43ba f 2775ba 45.67a 58.81ba 2925a
Hacalu 42.33ba 58.33bac 2662.5bc 32.67ed 31.67ed 2075dc
51.91ebdac 2612.5bc 40.33ed
Bulga70 40.67bc f d 37dc c 2400bc
2562.5bc 1987.5d
CS20DK 40.67bc 44.14ebdcf d 31ed 34.67ed c
2537.5bc
Dosha 40.33bc 52.38ebdac d 28e 27.33e 1762.5d
2837.5b
Holeta02 35.67dc 42.67edcf 2300ecd 44ba 54.67bc a
1987.5d
Local 35.33dc 44ebdcf 2275ecd 31.33ed 30.33ed c
2012.5d
Tesfa 35dc 40.33edf 2250ecd 31.33ed 35.33ed c
Obse 35dc 40.48edcf 2200ed 46a 73.81a 2962.5a
55.95ba
Gora 33.67d 41.71edcf 2100e 46a c 2962.5a
37.67bd 46.09bd 2387.5b
Degaga 31.33d 34f 1962.5e c c c
FB Didia 30.67d 39ef 1937.5e 32.33ed 34.67ed 2050dc
10.1714 23.9315 12.0525
CV (%) 4 22.25734 10.62186 11.0339 7 5
LSD (5%) 6.559 18 435.99 6.9101 18.009 483.46
P<value 0.0001 0.0326 0.0001 <.0001 0.0001 <.0001
Means with the same letter at the same column are not significantly different at 5%
LSD, DAS= Days after sowing, CV= Coefficient of Variation, LSD= Least Significant
difference

13
Table 3. Chocolate spot disease (Botrytis fabae) faba beans (Vicia faba) varieties at Guduru Site
in main growing season

Guduru
Varietie
2016 2017
s
DS PSI AUDPC DS PSI AUDPC
33.33bd
Obse 43.67a 52.86a 2800a c 31de 2125bdc
Hacalu 41.33ba 51.097a 2650ba 30.67d 31de 1950d
Tesfa 41bac 51.57a 2612.5ba 31.33dc 35.33dec 2025bdc
Holeta02 41bac 52.86a 2612.5ba 33bdc 31de 2100bdc
Dosha 41bac 52.38a 2600ba 40.67a 50.33ba 2612.5a
45.96ba 2537.5ba
Local 39.67bdc c c 31.33dc 35.33dec 2000bdc
45.48ba
Mesay 39.33bdc c 2525bc 30.67d 31.67dec 1962.5d
38.67bed 41.62bd
FB Didia c c 2475bdc 31d 31de 1962.5d
38.33bed
Tumsa c 49ba 2475bdc 40.67a 56.24a 2625a
37.33fed 46.72ba 2387.5be 33.67bd
Moti c c dc c 31de 2150bdac
36.33fed 41.62bd
Degaga g c 2300fedc 31.33dc 27.33e 1987.5dc
40.33bd
Gora 35.33feg c 2250fed 30.67d 31de 1937.5d
36.62bde
CS20DK 35feg 39dc 2225fed 33bdc c 2075bdc
40.33bd 44.67bda 2462.5ba
Bulga70 34fg c 2162.5fe 38bac c c
Kasa 33g 35.33d 2087.5f 38.33ba 45.95bac 2475ba
11.7899 12.2347
CV (%) 5.962345 4 6.573406 3 23.78377 13.26777
LSD (5%) 3.8226 9.0202 268.99 6.9255 14.572 480.06
P<value <.0001 0.0027 0.0002 0.0253 0.0079 0.0322
Means with the same letter at the same column are not significantly different at 5% LSD, CV= Coefficient
of Variation, LSD= Least Significant difference, PSI = Percent Severity Index and AUDPC = Area Under
Disease Progressive Curve

3.4. Disease progress rate

For the disease progressive curves, the Logistic model ( R²=97) was better described the
disease progression from the analysis of epidemiological data than the Gompertz model

14
(R²=95). The disease progress rate ( units day -1) was calculated for the varieties in both 2016
and 2017 cropping season at both location Guduru and Shambu experimental site ( Table 4). At
Guduru experimental site, in 2016 the disease progress rate was higher on Obse and Hacalu
varieties 0.0421units day -1 and 0.0391 units day -1
, respectively, while slower disease progress
rate was calculated on Kasa and Bulga-70 varieties 0.0284units day -1, and 0.0296 units day -1,
respectively (Table 4 and Figure 1). In year 2017 cropping season the faster disease progress rate
-1 -1
was competed on Tumsa and Dosha varieties 0.0354units day and 0.0351 units day ,
respectively, whereas, on Gora and Hacalu varieties slower disease progress rate 0.0283units day
-1 -1
and 0.0287units day , respectively (Table 4 and Figure 1). At Shambu experimental site the
disease progress rate on Mesay, Moti and Kasa varieties was faster by 0.0441 units day -1, and
0.0371units day -1, respectively, whereas relatively slower was calculated on FB Didia and
-1
Degaga varieties 0.0271units day and 0.0294units day -1, respectively, in 2016 main cropping
season (Table 4 and Figure 2). In this area, in 2017 main cropping season, on Obse, Moti, Gora
and Tumsa varieties, the disease progress rate was faster by 0.0459 units day -1, 0.0409units day
-1 -1
, 0.0405units day and 0.0403units day -1, respectively, whereas, on Dosha, Kasa, CS20DK
-1
varieties and Local cultivar, the disease progress rate relatively slower 0.0222units day ,
0.0251units day -1 , 0.0268units day -1 and 0.0284 units day -1
(Table 4 and Figure 2). Generally,
the disease progression was supported by the disease severity and area under disease progressive
curve against the varieties at both sites.

15
Table 4. Disease parameter estimates for chocolate spot disease (Botrytis fabae) of faba beans
(Vicia faba) varieties at both Shambu and Guduru experimental site in 2016 and 2017 years of
main growing season
2016 2017
Location Treatmen r a
S b
R² c
r S R²
t
Guduru varietie
s
FB 0.0049 0.88 0.0031 0.957
DIDA'A 0.0294 0.0348
HACALU 0.0287 0.0038 0.93 0.0391 0.0035 0.962
Degaga 0.0298 0.0038 0.95 0.0311 0.0022 0.97
Tumsa 0.0354 0.0047 0.97 0.0335 0.0036 0.952
Local 0.0309 0.0048 0.96 0.0369 0.0046 0.938
Dosha 0.0351 0.0051 0.95 0.0372 0.0032 0.963
CS20DK 0.0312 0.0048 0.95 0.0298 0.0029 0.959
Bulga 70 0.0338 0.0045 0.95 0.0296 0.0033 0.932
Kasa 0.0341 0.0051 0.92 0.0284 0.0026 0.964
Holeta 0.0042 0.96 0.0035 0.95
02 0.0321 0.0376
Gora 0.0283 0.0039 0.83 0.0301 0.0024 0.956
Mesay 0.0289 0.0043 0.96 0.0351 0.0032 0.966
Obse 0.0321 0.0043 0.92 0.0421 0.0031 0.974
Moti 0.0326 0.0046 0.96 0.0315 0.0051 0.877
Tesfa 0.0309 0.0043 0.95 0.0381 0.0028 0.976
Shambu varietie
s
FB 0.0026 0.964 0.0036 0.91
DIDA'A 0.0319 0.0271
HACALU 0.0321 0.0041 0.927 0.0354 0.0043 0.92
Degaga 0.0353 0.0039 0.926 0.0294 0.0048 0.86
Tumsa 0.0403 0.0042 0.953 0.0362 0.0052 0.9
Local 0.0284 0.0038 0.933 0.0311 0.0038 0.94
Dosha 0.0222 0.0044 0.871 0.0337 0.0044 0.92
CS20DK 0.0268 0.0032 0.942 0.0345 0.0046 0.92
Bulga 70 0.0331 0.0029 0.949 0.0353 0.0048 0.89

16
 Kasa 0.0251 0.0031 0.939 0.0371 0.0064 0.88
Holeta 0.0029 0.964 0.0028 0.95
02 0.0384 0.0326
Gora 0.0405 0.0031 0.954 0.0301 0.0024 0.97
Mesay 0.0366 0.0044 0.933 0.0441 0.0044 0.95
Obse 0.0459 0.0036 0.968 0.0304 0.0027 0.96
Moti 0.0409 0.0048 0.924 0.0371 0.0042 0.93
Tesfa 0.0316 0.0035 0.946 0.0305 0.0051 0.9
Parameter estimates are from a linear regression of logistic model ln(y/1-y)) disease severity proportion on time (days after
planting
a Disease progress rate represent the equation of the line both in 2016 and 2017 at both experimental site
b Standard error of the parameter estimates both in 2016 and 2017 at both experimental site
c Coefficient of determination for the logistic model both in 2016 and 2017 at both experimental site

17
 0.7

0.6

0.5 f(x) = 0.01 x − 0.15

R² = 0.98
Proportion of PSI

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
40 55 70 85 100 115
Days After Planting

FB DIDA'A HACALU Degaga Tumsa Local Dosha

CS20DK Bulga 70 Kasa Holeta 02 Gora Mesay
Obse Moti Tesfa Average Linear (Average)

0.7

0.6
f(x) = 0.01 x − 0.19
0.5 R² = 0.98
Proportion of PSI

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
40 55 70 85 100 115
Days After Planting
FB DIDA'A HACALU Degaga Tumsa Local
Dosha CS20DK Bulga 70 Kasa Holeta 02
Gora Mesay Obse Moti Tesfa
Average Linear (Average) Linear (Average)

Figure 1. The average Disease Progress curve (DPC) for chocolate spot diseases (Botrytis fabae) on faba
bean (Vicia faba) varieties at Guduru experimental site in 2016 and 2017 growing year

18
 0.7

0.6

0.5 f(x) = 0.01 x − 0.19

Proportion of PSI

R² = 0.99
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
40 55 70 85 100 115
Days after planting
FB DIDA'A HACALU Degaga Tumsa Local Dosha
CS20DK Bulga 70 Kasa Holeta 02 Gora Mesay
Obse Moti Tesfa Average Linear (Average) Linear (Average)

0.7

0.6
f(x) = 0.01 x − 0.13
0.5 R² = 0.96
Proportion of PSI

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
40 55 70 85 100 115
Days after Planting
FB DIDA'A HACALU Degaga Tumsa Local Dosha
CS20DK Bulga 70 Kasa Holeta 02 Gora Mesay
Obse Moti Tesfa Average Linear (Average) Linear (Average)

Figure 2. Disease Progress curve (DPC) for chocolate spot diseases (Botrytis fabae) of faba bean
(Vicia faba) varieties at Shambu experimental site in 2016 and 2017 growing year

19
3.5. Association of disease parameters with location and cropping season

The correlation matrix of the disease severity, percent severity index and area under disease
progress curve with the two locations Guduru and Shambu experimental site as well as both two
years in 2016 and 2017 main cropping season was positive. The correlations of disease incidence
and severity (r) with weed density were 0.565 (260 degrees of freedom (df)) and 0.521 (260 df),
respectively, and for field sizes the correlationwas 0.242, (df 260) and 0.230, (df 260),
respectively. Altitude and plant population in this survey had no significant effects on disease
severity. The Chi-square correlation analysis showed significant variation among the disease
parameters (P < 0.01 and P< 0.05) for disease incidence and severity of chocolate spot (Table 5).

Table 4. Chi-squared analysis of chocolate spot disease, severity, PSI and AUDPC by location
and time

Disease DS16a DS17b PSI16c PSI17d AUDPC16e AUDPC17f

Parameter
Guduru
DS16 1 .656** .896** .588** .994** .659**
DS17 .656** 1 .515** .935** .663** .998**
PSI16 .896** .515** 1 .416** .884** .519**
PSI17 .588** .935** .416** 1 .586** .935**
AUDPC16 .994** .663** .884** .586** 1 .665**
AUDPC17 .659** .998** .519** .935** .665** 1
Shambu
DS16 1 .227 .869** .027 .992** .232
DS17 .227 1 .016 .915** .224 .997**
PSI16 .869** .016 1 -.180 .852** .021
PSI17 .027 .915** -.180 1 .022 .914**
AUDPC16 .992** .224 .852** .022 1 .228
AUDPC17 .232 .997** .021 .914** .228 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level
a= Disease severity recorded in 2016 main cropping year
b= Disease severity recorded in 2017 main cropping year
c= Percent severity index in 7 days interval calculated from disease severity in 2016 main cropping year
d= Percent severity index in 7 days interval calculated from disease severity in 2017 main cropping year
e= Area under disease progress curve from PSI in 2016 main cropping year
f= Area under disease progress curve from PSI in 2017 main cropping year

4. DISCUSSION
In general, the response of the varieties against chocolate spot had revealed individually similar
with reports of Mekuria et al (2015), however, all varieties are influenced by chocolate spot
disease because the severities were recorded above 30% at Guduru site and 27% at Shambu site
main growing season. That means, minimum disease severity was recorded from Gora variety

20
31.33% and 27%, respectively, followed by Degaga, Bulga 70, and Holeta-02 at both sites,
respectively. While, maximum disease severity was recorded from Mesay variety 49.33% and
56.33% followed by Local cultivar, Kasa and Tesfa variety at both Guduru and Shambu sites
respectively. This varieties are comparatively resistance to chocolate spot disease which is not in
lined with Mekuria et al (2015) reports because Hacalu and degage variety are highly infected by
chocolate spot disease, however, in opposite of this, this result is supported by Mesele et al.,
(2016).
The result revealed that the disease incidence of chocolate spot was significantly different
(P≤0.05) among the varieties at both sites. The mean maximum chocolate spot diseases were
recorded from Mesay variety, 79% and 80% at Guduru and Shambu sites, respectively, while
minimum disease incidence was recorded from Gora 63.33% at Shambu site, followed by
Holeta-02 and Hacalu varieties, but Bulga 70 variety (42.67%) followed by Holeta-02, FB didia
and local cultivar varieties at Guduru site. As compared with local check 67.67%, disease
incidence is higher on nine varieties at Guduru site including Mesay, Kasa, Dosha, Obse, Moti,
CS20DK, Degaga, Tumsa and Gora varieties, while only three varieties are higher than local
check 78.33% at Shambu site; they were Mesay, Kasa and Tesfa varieties (Table-1).

Generally, higher disease incidence are recorded at Shambu site as comparing to Guduru site
because this prominent values and variation of disease in general is might be due to
environmental variation from other locations of high rainfall during the cropping season at the
study area. Dereje et al. (1994) has reported that prolonged rainfall is conducive for chocolate
spot development leading to complete crop loss and Villegas-Fernández et al. (2010) has
reported that chocolate spot incidence is strongly influencing by climatic conditions.

Logistic model explain better than Gompertiz model in describing the rate of chocolate spot
infection. Logistic model has been reported to be most appropriate for temporal analysis of
disease development because of wide application and goodness of fit for describing many
epidemics (Campbell and Madden, 1989)

This indicates that chocolate spot infection rate was related to the logarithm of the ratio of the
amount of diseased and health tissues present as described by the Campbell and Madden
(1989).

21
The varieties which have higher AUDPC value indicate the more susceptible one, while
varieties, which have, lower AUDPC value are varieties which are resistant for the diseases
(Fernández-Aparicio et al., 2011).

In both locations, the percent severity index (PSI) shows that there is a significant difference
(P<0.05) among the faba bean varieties evaluated for chocolate spot. In both experimental sites,
highest PSI was recorded from Mesay (56.64%) followd by local cultiva 52.43% at Guduru site
and 64.68% and 54.72% Shambu site. However, the minimum PSI was observed from varieties
which were comparatively resistant including, Gora, Holeta-02, Bulga 70 and Degaga varieties,
with a corresponding of 35.98%, 40.19%, 38.66% and 34.82%, respectively at Guduru site and
31.00%, 32.91%, 34.83% and 35.21%, respectively at Shambu site (Table 2). Similarly, the
minimum PSI was obtained comparatively from Guduru site, which indicates lower disease
intensity was occurred from this site, while chocolate spot disease intensity was higher at
Shambu site during the experimentation.

Generally, based on PSI data this result discussed that Gora, Holeta-02, Bulga 70, FB didia,
Hacalu, Obse and Degaga varieties are moderately resistant to chocolate spot disease at both
locations in average according to Abo-Hegazy et al. (2012) grade, which is not supported with
the report of (Mekuria and Ashenafi 2015), highest PSI has recorded from Degaga variety. On
contrary, Mesay is moderately susceptible at Guduru site, while, it is susceptible to the disease at
Shambu site.

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENNDATION

Chocolate spot disease is the major biotic problem that affects the productivity of faba bean
varieties at Bale Zone. Identification of faba bean varieties for high yield and resistance for
chocolate spot disease is impressive for Horro Guduru Zone. Generally, this finding revealed that
chocolate spot disease is the most important disease affecting faba bean (Vicia faba) in Ethiopia
causing considerable reduction in yield. Even if chocolate spot severity and incidence were
occurred at both locations, the disease was more severe at Shambu District, while minimum

22
chocolate spot severity and incidence were recorded at Guduru district for all varieties. By this
experiment resistant, moderately resistant and susceptible varieties for the disease were identified
for the locations. The result revealed that from the evaluated fourteen improved faba bean
varieties and one local cultivar, four of them, namely Gora, Holeta-02, Degaga and Bulga 70
varieties were resistant to chocolate spot disease, whereas the other three varieties including
Mesay, Kasa and local cultivar are comparatively susceptible and the left are moderately
resistant to the disease in the study area. Therefore, these varieties are recommended for the
farmers in the study area in their farming plan considering chocolate spot disease problem. Even
though, this study was indicated some clues the severity of and the impact of the disease on faba
bean varieties are vary from location to location. This variation may be due to environmental
variation between the locations, including high rainfall during the cropping season. Prolonged
rainfall is conducive for chocolate spot development leading to complete crop loss (Dereje et al.,
1994). Chocolate spot incidence is strongly influenced by climatic conditions (Villegas-
Fernández et al., 2010).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors, we would like to thank Wollega University Research and community service
Directorate for their financial support and Shambu Campus College of Agriculture and natural
resources coordinator and all Plant Science staff for their active participation when the
experiment was conducted.

6. REFERENCES

Abo-Hegazy SR, Noha F, El-Badawy MM, Abd El-Menem H (2012). Evaluation of some faba
bean genotypes against chocolate spot disease using cDNA fragments of chitinase gene
and some traditional methods. Asian J. Agric. Res. 6:60-72.

Asfaw Telaye, Tesfaye Getachew and Beyene Demitsu. 1994. Genetics and breeding of
faba bean. Pp .122-137. In: Asfaw Telaye (Eds). Cool-season food Legumes in Ethiopia.
Proceedings: First National Cool-season Food legume Review Conference, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

23
Ayman ME, Kamar MA, Khalid MG (2009). Amino and humic acids promote growth, yield and
disease resistance of faba bean cultivated in clayey soil. Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci.
3(2):731-739.

Bernier Hanounik CCSB, Hussein MM, Mohamed HA., 1993. Field manual of common faba
bean diseases in the Nile Valley. International Center for Agricultural Research in
the Dry Areas ICARDA. Information Bulletin No. 3.

Bond, D.A. D.A. Laws, G.C Hawtin, M.C. Saxena, and J. S. Stephens, 1985. Faba bean
(Vicia faba L.). pp. 199-265. In Summerfield, R.J. and Roberts, E.H. (Eds.). Grain
Legume Crops. William Collins Sons Co. Ltd., London, UK.

Dereje Gorfu and Tesfaye Beshir. 1994. Review of faba bean disease research in
Ethiopia. Pp. 328-345. In: Proceedings of the First National Review Workshop on Cool
season food legumes. Dec. 16-18, 1993.IAR, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Dereje Gorfu, 1999. Survival of Botrytis fabae Sard. between seasons on crop debris in field
soils at Holetta, Ethiopia. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 38:68-75.

FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics Division) (2010). Available at:
http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx

Gemechu Keneniand and Mussa Jarso, 2002. Comparison of three secondary traits as
determinants of grain yield in faba bean on waterlogged Vertisols. Journal of
Genetics and Breeding 56: 317-326.

Habtu Assefa and Dereje Gorfu, 1985. Review of pulse disease research in Ethiopia. Pp. 345-
401. In: Tsedeke Abate (ed.) Proceedings of the First Crop Protection Symposium in
Ethiopia. Feb. 4 -7, 1985, IAR, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Hanounik SB (1986). Screening techniques for disease resistance in faba bean. ICARDA,
Aleppo, Syria, P 59.

Harrison JC., 1988. The biology of Botrytis spp. on Vicia beans and chocolate spot disease - a
review. Plant Pathology 37: 168-201

ICARDA (International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas) (1986). Screening
techniques for disease resistance in faba bean. Aleppo, Syria.

ICARDA (International Center of Agricultural Research in Dry areas), 2006. Technology

Generations and Dissemination for Sustainable Production of Cereals and Cool Season
Legumes. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Aleppo,
Syria. 256 p.

24
Mekuria Wolde* and Ashenafi Mitiku, 2015. Evaluation of faba beans (Vacia faba L.) varieties
for chocolate spot (Botrytis fabae L.) disease resistance at Sinana and Agarfa district of
Bale Zone, Southeastern Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Science and
Technology (AJAST) Vol. 3, Issue 7, pp. 341-346. July 2015

Mesele Haile, Girma Adugna and Fikre Lemessa, 2016. Reactions of improved faba bean
varieties to chocolate spot (Botrytis fabae Sard.) epidemics across contrasting altitudes in
southwest Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research. Vol. 11(10), pp. 837-848,
10 March, 2016

Samuel S, Abang MM, Chemeda F, Seid A, Sakhuja PK, Baum M (2008). Pathogenic and
genetic diversity of Botrytis fabae Sand. isolates from faba bean fields in different agro-
ecological zones of Northern Ethiopia.

SAS Institute Inc (2008). SAS/STATA Guide for Personal Computers Version 9.2 edition. SAS
Institute, Carry NC, USA.

Sahile S, S Ahmed, C Fininsa, MM Abang, PK Sakhuja (2008). Survey of chocolate spot

(Botrytis fabae) disease of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) and assessment of factors
influencing disease epidemics in northern Ethiopia. Crop Prot. 27:1457-1463.

Torres, A. M., B. Roman, C.M. Avila,Z. Satovic,D. Rubiales, J. C. Sillero, J.I. Cubero and M.T.
Moreno, 2006. Faba bean breeding for resistance against biotic stresses: towards
application of marker technology. Euphytica 147, 67-80.

Villegas-Fernandez AM, Sillero, JC, and Rubiales D (2012). Screening faba bean for chocolate
spot resistance: evaluation methods and effects of age of host tissue and temperature. Eur.
J. Plant Pathol. 132:443-453.

Yohannes Degago, 2000. Faba Bean (Vicia faba) in Ethiopia. Institute of Biodiversity,
Conservation and Research (IBCR). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 43 p.

25