International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science IJPBCS

Vol. 7(3), pp. 885-893, October, 2020. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: 2167-0449

Research Article

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella

xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.)
Genotypes in Ethiopia
Admikew Getaneh Yigletu*
Jimma Agricultural Research Center (JARC), Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Ethiopia
E-mail: adamget21@gmail.com

Genetics studies of coffee wilt disease (CWD) and related traits provide valuable evidence in
designing appropriate breeding programs and CWD resistant variety development. The use of
CWD resistant varieties is the most cost-effective, economical and eco-friendly method for the
management of the disease. It is also relevant to smallholder coffee producers or farmers. The
study was conducted to evaluate and select promising CWD resistant genotypes, to estimate
the genetics of traits and determine the correlation among traits. It was conducted in RCBD
with three replications in17 coffee genotypes using artificial seedling inoculation test at the
green house, Jimma Agricultural Research Center (JARC). The analysis of variance showed
highly significant differences (p<0.01) among the genotypes for wilted seedling percentage,
incubation period, number of defoliated leaves and all seedling growth characters (height,
stem diameter, average inter node length, petiole length, leaf area, number of nodes and
leaves). The overall mean performance showed that genotypes 279/71 and Feyate (971)
recorded 6.84% and 8.60% wilted seedling percentage (resistant), respectively; followed by
Odicha (974) and 79233. The wilted seedling percentage also showed high broad sense
heritability coupled with high genetic advance as percent of the mean (GAM). The study is well
done and identified promising CWD resistant genotypes, which should be further study on
multi-location (field condition) and also evaluated for yield, other major diseases and important
traits.

Keywords: Arabica coffee, Heritability, Genetic advanceand Resistant

INTRODUCTION

The global coffee production depends only on two species,
Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora (Labouisse et al.,
2008). Southwestern Ethiopia is the primary center of
origin and genetic diversity for Coffea arabica (Sylvian,
1955; Meyer, 1965; Anthony et al., 2001; Anthony et al.
2002). In 2018/19, world coffee production wasestimated
as10,126.2million kg, with Arabica output, estimated at
6227.4 million kg, accounting for 61% and Robusta,
estimated as3898.8 million kg, representing 39% of the
total.In Africa coffee production was estimated about
1092.36 million kg. Ethiopia shared about 492.6 million
kgand the first producer and exporter in Africa and 5th in
the world (produce 5% of the world and 39 % of sub
Saharan Africa) (ICO, 2019). Arabica coffee shares about
34% of the total exports and 43% of agricultural exports of
the country (Rachel, 2019). Coffee farming alone provides
a livelihood income for around 15 million Ethiopians (16%
of the population), based on four million smallholder farms
(Tefera, 2015).This showed that how much coffee is
important for the Ethiopian economy. However, its
production is low due to traditional coffee production
systems; such as the use of local coffee genotypes, the
widespread and prevalence of diseases, the presence of
abiotic stress and poor agronomic practices (Girma et al.,
2009a).
Coffee berry disease (CBD), coffee wilt disease (CWD)
and coffee leaf rust (CLR) are among the major important
coffee diseases in Ethiopia. Coffee wilt disease (CWD) is
induced by the fungal pathogen Fusarium xylarioides

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Admikew Y. 886

(Gibberella xylarioides). Its incidence and severity are 28%
and 5%, respectively (CABI, 2003; Girma et al., 2009a).
There are different techniques used to control CWD, such
as uprooting and burning of infected coffee trees,
prevention of tree wounding, use of protective fungicides
in sealing wounds, use of disease free planting materials,
disinfecting farm implement and use of biological control
(Trichoderma species). Among which the use of resistant
varieties is the most relevant to producers or farmers
(Rutherford, 2006; Phiri and Baker, 2009; Girma et al.,
2009a). Thus, study was conducted to evaluate and select
promising CWD resistant Arabica coffee genotypes for the
future varietal development, to understand the genetics of
traits and the association of them with morphological traits
under diseased condition.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Description of the Study Area
The study was conducted at Jimma Agricultural Research
Center (in green house) in Jimma Zone of Oromia
Regional State, Southwest Ethiopia. It is found 7o46’N
latitude and 36o E longitude coordinate and at an elevation
of 1753 meter above sea level. It is also located 358
kilometers away from Addis Ababa and 12 kilometer from
Jimma town in the west direction.
COFFEE GENOTYPES AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Seventeen Arabica coffee genotypes were evaluated for
four CWD parameters and seven seedling morphological
characters (Table 1). The experiment was laid out using
randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three
replications. The growth medium of coffee seedlings was
prepared from heat sterilized and moistened sandy soil.
Forty Coffee seeds of each genotype were soaked
separately in distilled sterile water for about 48 hours after
removing the parchment (Girma and Mengistu, 2000). The
seeds were sown in heat sterilized and moistened sandy
soil in disinfected plastic pots (each pot has 5652 cm 3) and
can irrigated with sterile water every one day’s interval to
maintain adequate moisture for seed germination,
emergence and growth. After germination, the seedlings
were thinned into twenty five per pot, out of these, 20
seedlings were used for artificial inoculation test and the
remaining five seedlings were used as a control (non-
inoculated). Five representative inoculated seedlings were
selected from each pot and labeled yellow thread in order
to measure growth characters. The seedlings per pot for
each genotype were inoculated at the fully opened
cotyledon stage (10 weeks old) with a viable conidial
suspension of Gibberella xylarioides by the stem nicking
technique (Pieters and Van der Graaff, 1980; Girma and
Mengistu, 2000).

Table1: Description of Arabica coffee genotypes used for the study

Coffee Origin Breeding method Released/collection Some characters description
genotypes year
75227 Gera, /Jimma Selection from 1980/81 Open growth habit, good yielder, green tip leaf
local color, CBD resistant, susceptible to CWD
Landraces (Demelash and Kifle., 2015)
971 Gelana Abaya/ Selection from 2010 Resistant to CWD (Chala et al., 2012)
Borena local landraces
74110 Metu / Illubabor Selection from 1978/79 Resistant to CBD, susceptible to CWD, good
local landraces yielder, compact growth habit, green tip leaf
color (Demelash and Kifle., 2015)
8136 Gera/ Jimma Selection from 2006 High yielding potential with consistence bearing
local landraces habits, resistant to CBD & CLR, vigorous with
intermediate growth habit, stiff stem,
manageable height, moderately resistant to
CWD (Girma, 2004)
79233 Introduce from International 1979 Green tip leaf color, CWD resistant under
France collection natural infested soil (PO under coffee
germplasm conservation at Gera)
74144A Balle/ Oromia Under collection 1978/79 Moderately resistant to CWD under natural
breeding program infested soil, susceptible to CBD, high quality,
compact growth habit, broth leaf color (PO)
974 Gelana Abaya/ Selection from 2010 Broth tip leaf color, compact growth habit
Borena local landraces resistant to CWD (Chala et al., 2012)
370 Seka-Chekorsa/ Selection from Resistant to CWD, broth tip leaf color,
Jimma local landraces susceptible to CBD (Demelash, 2013)

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Catimor Introduced from International 1998 Resistant to CWD (Girma, 2004)
J-19 Portugal collection
Catimor Introduced from International 1998 Resistant to CWD (Girma, 2004)
J-21 Portugal collection
7440 Washi, Kaffa Selection from 1979/80 Moderately resistant to CWD (Girma, 2004)
local landraces
279/71 Sokoru/Jimma Selection from 2013 CWD resistant, CBD susceptible (Demelash,
local landraces 2013)
B-64/04 Balle / Oromia Collection under 2004 CWD resistant (Kifle et al., 2015)
breeding program
B-70/04 Balle / Oromia Collection under 2004 CWD resistant (Kifle et al., 2015)
breeding program
74144B Balle / Oromia Collection under 1978/79 Susceptible to CBD, compact growth habit (PO)
breeding program
Geisha* Introduced from International 2002 Highly susceptible to CWD (Demelash, 2013)
India collection
SN-5* Kaffa/ SNNPR Under collection Susceptible to CWD (Girma, 2004)
breeding program
*= susceptible check, PO= personal observation. Source: JARC / Coffee Breeding and Genetics division database for
genotypes origin, breeding method and some characters description

Data on wilted seedling percentage (at 6 months after variability for wilted seedling percentage (Figure 1).
inoculation, was calculated from the cumulative number of Furthermore, mean squares due to genotypes for all
wilted over the total number of seedlings (wilted plus growth characters showed highly significant (p<0.01).
healthy) based on external symptoms), incubation periods
(the time elapsed from inoculation of the pathogen up to Coffee genotypes reaction against CWD and seedling
symptoms expression of each genotype), number of growth characters
defoliated and yellow leaves per seedling were collected
for disease parameters. Furthermore, seedling growth The mean performances of 17 coffee genotypes for 11
characters such as stem height (cm), stem diameter (mm), characters are given in Table 3. It was observed that
numbers of stem nodes per seedling (NN), number of wilted seedling percentage, number of yellow leaves per
leaves per seedling, leaf petiole length (cm), average inter seedling, incubation period (IP) and seedling height
nodes length on the stem (AINL) and leaf area (cm 2) were ranged from 6.84 % to 94.74 %; 0.02 to 1.20; 71 to 155
measure and computed per tree based on Walyero (1983). days;and 7.91cm to 12.34 cm, respectively. Genotypes
Growth characters were measured from4 months old 279/71 and Catimor J-21 represented the maximum and
seedling based on IPGR (1996) coffee descriptors. minimum mean value of the traits; except for wilted
seedling percentage and number of yellow leaves per
All data were subjected to analyses of variance (ANOVA) seedling, which were in the reverse direction. Similarly,
using SAS software version 9.3 (SAS, 2011). Fisher’s seedling stem diameter internodes length, number of
least significant different mean separation test was nodes and number of leaves per seedling, petiole length,
performed to identify and compare genotypes. The leaf area and defoliated leaves per seedling ranged from
phenotypic, genotypic and environmental variances were 1.84cm (Catimor J-19 ) to 2.27cm (7440) ,1.48 (Catimor J-
estimated based on the method suggested by Singh and 19 ) to 4.25cm (370), 1.20 and 4.80 (974) to 2.31 and 6.49
Chaudhury (1985). Broad sense heritability and genetic (74110), 0.35cm (79233) to 0.50cm (971), 6.41cm2
advance for CWD and seedling growth characters were (Catimor J-19 ) to 11.87cm2 (279/71) and 0.00 (279/71)
also computed using the formula suggested by (Allard, to 1.00 (74110), respectively. These data indicated that the
1999). The area under the disease progress curve presence of high genetic diversity between genotypes for
(AUDPC) was also calculated to quantify the level of the the above measured characters (Van der Graaff and
rate reducing the resistance of genotypes based on Jeger Pieters, 1978; Girma et al., 2009b; Chala et al., 2012;
and Viljanen-Rollinson (2001). Demelash and Kifle, 2015; Bayetta, 2001; Olika et al.,
2011).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Genotype 279/71 was the uppermost genotype that
observed desirable characters for most traits; such as for
Analysis of variance wilted seedling percentage (low CWD infection),
incubation period, seedling height, seedling stem
Analysis of variance mean squares of 17 genotypes for diameter, leaf area, the number of defoliate and yellow
CWD and seedling growth characters are presented in leaves per seedling. Genotypes 279/71 (6.84%) and 971
Table 2. The analysis showed highly significant differences (8.60%) exhibited low wilted seedling percentage coupled
(p<0.01) among genotypes for all CWD characters and the with the longer incubation period, 155 days and 121 days,

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Admikew Y. 888

respectively, followed by 974 and 79233 genotypes. months after inoculation starting from older leaves to
Moreover, the AUDPC mean result showed significant younger ones. That means the first true leaves became
variation and progression over time between genotypes yellow; then, either dropped down or wilted without
(Figure 2). Low AUDPC mean was calculated for defoliating and progress to the next true leaves. At the end,
genotypes 279/71 and 971 similar to wilted seedling the seedlings were dead completely. This indicated that
percentage. genotypes with a greater extent of leaves changed to
yellow and recorded the maximum amount of defoliated or
Most Arabica coffee genotypes leaves color were changed wilted leaves showed relatively higher CWD infection and
to yellow and then, either defoliated or stayed intact3 to 4 could be considered as susceptible to the disease.

Table 2: The analysis of variance (ANOVA) of CWD and seedling growth characters mean squares for 17 Arabica
coffee genotypes
Characters mean square and p’
DF WS IP AUDPC NDL NYL SH SSD AINL NN PL LA NL
Sources
(%) (days) (no.) (no.) (cm) (cm) (cm) (no.) (cm) (cm2) (no.)
1000.98 5110325.
Block 2 456.37 0.010 0.040 0.89 0.024 0.42 0.036 0.002 1.056 0.544
(666.29) 2
Genotyp 2161.31** 1290.27 16205358 0.241 0.255 0.039* 0.267* 0.005* 0.766*
16 6.31** 1.83** 9.49**
es (1179.73**) ** .7** ** ** * * * *
Error 32 103.11 (58.35) 157.77 784550.8 0.029 0.050 0.400 0.005 0.101 0.011 0.0005 0.967 0.125
*, ** = significant at 5% and 1% probability level, respectively, DF = degree of freedom, p’ = probability level, cm= cent
meter, cm2= cent meter square, mm= mill meter, no. = number AINL= average inter node length, AUDPC = area under
disease progress curve, IP = incubation period, LA= leaf area, NDL= number of defoliate leaves per seedling, NL= number
of leaves per seedling, NN= nodes number, NYL= number of yellow leaves per seedling, PL= petiole length, SH= seedling
height, SSD= seedling stem diameter, WS%= Wilted coffee seedlings percentage. Data in bracket is arcsine transformed
value of wilted seedlings percentage

In general, the mean analysis result of genotype 279/71
was the lowest wilted seedling percentage, minimum
number of defoliate leaves and yellow leaves per seedling,
longest incubation period, tallest height and widest leaf
area compared to others. Therefore, it was promising
genotype to CWD resistant and for most other important
characters; followed by 974 and 79233. However,
genotypes 279/71 and 971 were not significantly different
for wilted seedling percentage. On the other hand, Catimor
J-21 was susceptible to CWD and undesirable genotype
for the characters mentioned above, followed by Catimor
J-19, Geisha, 75227 and B-64/04. Therefore, the present
study confirmed that 279/71, 971, 974 and 79233
genotypes revealed resistant to moderately resistant or
tolerant to CWD and important to inclusion in future
resistance breeding programs. Compared with inoculated
seedlings non inoculated ones showed no any CWD
symptoms or death on the same experimental pots.
CWD resistant genotypes showed relatively and
significantly longer incubation period, elongated height,
wider leaf area and stem diameter than the susceptible
genotypes. This result contributes to some insight for CWD
resistant selection criteria. The incubation period result
indicated that after the pathogen favor for penetration to
the genotypes, the host (Arabica coffee genotype) struggle
to protect themselves from a severe infection, even after
the infection takes place. The host most likely defends
themselves through either genetic, mechanical barrier or
chemical release or a combination of these defense
mechanisms before symptoms appearance on their parts.
This statement also supported by Agrios (2005), some of
the plant defense structures and substances exist before
the plant comes into contact with the pathogen, but the
most effective defense structures and substances are
produced in response to attack by the pathogen. Similarly,
wide stem diameter and leaf area possibly important for
resistance. Because, the wider diameter can provide some
amount of water from the root to the upper parts of the
seedling and withstand translocation problems, even if
there are clogging and hindrances of pathogens parts
inside it. So, the seedlings accomplish their physiological
activities and survive better than the thin diameter
genotypes. In case of extensive leaf area also survive
more due to the ability to photosynthesis efficiently and
prepare their optimum food. As a result, stem diameter
together with leaf area benefit the seedlings to become
better survive since the relatively optimum amount of water
translocation through the stem to the leaves parts to make
photosynthesis and synthesized food move into stem and
root to perform its physiological activities.
The present result is in harmony with some previous
scholars. According to Chala et al. (2012) varieties 971
and 974 showed low wilted seedling percentage and
considered as CWD resistant genotypes. Demelash
(2013) also reported 279/71 and 370 as CWD resistant
genotype; but the current result showed that 370
genotypes infected about 58%, it is a contradictory result.
Through continuous observation and follow up in the

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 889

germplasm conservation field, genotype 79233 did not
manifest any tree death; even though all coffee genotypes
were dead around it due to Gibberella xylarioides. Then,
this genotype was included in the study to check their
resistant level in the artificial inoculation test. Despite this,
some number of wilted seedlings happened; it gave
consistent resistant reaction and ranked the 4th resistant
genotype compared to all tested or previously screened
CWD resistant genotypes. However, the current results
for Catimor J-21 and Catimor J-19 varieties were different
from Girma (2004) report; he considered that these
varieties showed CWD resistant reaction under seedling
inoculation test and used as a resistant check in most
CWD screening studies. The possible cause of the present
result disagreement with previous works can be the type
of isolate used, differences between technical experts to
wound seedlings and put proper inoculum concentration
on it, environmental (greenhouse) conditions and season
or the combination of these factors during inoculation.

Figure 1: Arabica coffee variability for CWD and growth characters using artificial inoculation test in the
greenhouse;

A) resistant genotype (279/71) B) susceptible genotypes (Geisha) C) variability of genotypes to CWD at similar condition

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Admikew Y. 890

Table 3: Mean performance of 17 Arabica coffee genotypes for CWD and seedling growth characters
AUDP
Genotypes WS (%) IP (days) NDL NYL SH (cm) SSD (cm) AINL (cm) NN PL (cm) LA (cm2) NL
C
75227 67.8 (56.0) 91.7 5042.5 0.20 0.60 11.2 2.10 3.99 1.81 0.47 10.7 5.31
971 8.6 (13.0) 121.0 275.1 0.49 0.53 12.3 2.20 2.80 1.96 0.50 11.2 5.82
74110 66.7 (54.8) 104.7 3080.0 1.00 0.42 10.3 2.03 2.42 2.31 0.45 8.4 6.49
8136 57.8 (49.6) 106.7 3289.4 0.27 0.24 11.4 2.09 2.97 1.91 0.46 10.1 5.60
79233 35.0 (36.2) 125.3 1061.7 0.18 0.11 10.8 2.06 2.32 2.16 0.35 7.1 6.18
74144A 45.6 (42.5) 98.7 3013.7 0.68 0.32 11.4 2.15 2.86 2.26 0.46 9.0 6.34
974 23.3 (27.8) 121.0 653.3 0.09 0.11 11.9 2.11 3.75 1.20 0.43 9.9 4.80
370 58.5 (50.2) 116.7 2991.6 0.14 0.16 12.2 1.98 4.25 1.33 0.48 11.8 4.98
Catimor J-
19 93.3 (81.1) 73.7 6517.2 0.47 0.63 8.1 1.84 1.48 2.05 0.39 6.4 6.04
Catimor J-
21 94.7 (82.2) 71.0 8114.5 0.52 1.20 7.9 1.92 1.59 2.03 0.38 6.7 6.01
7440 65.0 (54.4) 98.0 4328.3 0.89 0.18 11.9 2.27 2.98 2.13 0.48 11.4 5.95
279/71 6.8 (12.5) 155.0 192.8 0.00 0.02 12.3 2.18 3.39 2.00 0.43 11.9 6.00
B-64/04 79.6 (63.8) 104.7 4172.4 0.51 0.27 10.5 1.96 2.94 1.77 0.44 8.3 5.35
B-70/04 57.6 (49.4) 94.7 3110.1 0.15 0.29 10.1 2.08 3.04 1.94 0.44 10.2 5.38
74144B 66.7 (54.8) 99.3 3383.3 0.49 0.49 12.3 2.11 2.87 2.16 0.46 9.7 6.12
Geisha 89.5 (71.1) 78.0 7113.4 0.38 0.63 8.6 1.90 2.05 2.08 0.44 9.3 6.00
SN-5 41.1 (39.8) 112.3 1678.2 0.15 0.13 10.9 2.10 3.73 1.72 0.44 11.7 5.02
Mean 56.33(49.4) 104.26 3412.8 0.39 0.37 10.83 2.06 2.91 1.93 0.44 9.62 5.73
LSD (0.05) 16.89(12.7) 20.89 1473.1 0.28 0.37 1.05 0.11 0.53 0.18 0.04 1.64 0.59
18.02(15.46
CV (%) ) 12.05 25.95 43.06 59.29 5.86 3.31 10.92 5.55 5.26 10.22 6.16
Data in bracket is arcsine transformed value of wilted seedlings percentage, cm= cent meter, cm2= cent meter square,
mm= mill meter
AINL= average inter node length, IP = incubation period, LA= leaf area, NDL= number of defoliate leaves per seedling,
NL= number of leaves, NN= number of nodes, NYL= number of yellow leaves per seedling, PL= petiole length, SH=
seedling height, SSD= seedling stem diameter, TWS%= Transformed value of Wilted seedlings percentage, WS%= Wilted
coffee seedlings percentage

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 891

Figure 2: AUDPC on CWD severity in Arabica coffee genotypes

Heritability

According to Verma and Agarwal (1982), heritability values
greater than 50% are considered as high, values less than
20% are low and between 20 to 50% as medium. Based
on this, all characters resistance showed high broad sense
heritability. The manifested of high broad sense heritability
along with GAM showed for low wilted seedling
percentage (CWD resistance), incubation period, seedling
height, average inter node length, nodes number, leaf
area, minimum number of defoliate leaves and yellow
leaves. According to Allard (1999) and Acquaah (2012)
heritability explanation, for these characters the observed
variability mostly due to heredity (genetic). Based on Table
4, the genotypic variance is greater than the environmental
variance for all traits. It indicates that the characters are
controlled most importantly by genes even if
environmental factors have their contribution. Therefore,
the phenotypic value of the characters used as a guide to
the breeding value (additive effect) and it aid to make
selection easily. As Fehr (1987) described, the
effectiveness of selection for a trait depends on the relative
importance of genetic and non-genetic factors in the
expression of phenotypic differences among genotypes in
a population.

Table 4: Estimation of variance components, heritability and GAM for CWD parameters and seedling growth
characters
Characters 𝛅𝟐 p 𝛅𝟐 g 𝛅𝟐 e H2B GA GAM
LWSP 720.44 686.07 34.37 95.23 52.65 93.48
Incubation period 430.09 377.50 52.59 87.77 37.50 35.97
MNDL 0.080 0.071 0.010 87.97 0.51 131.70
MNYL 0.085 0.068 0.017 80.39 0.48 130.49
Seedling height 2.102 1.97 0.133 93.66 2.80 25.83
Stem diameter 0.013 0.011 0.002 87.18 0.20 9.94
Average inter node length 0.610 0.576 0.034 94.48 1.52 52.24
Nodes number 0.089 0.085 0.004 95.88 0.59 30.53
Petiole length 0.0017 0.0015 0.0002 90.00 0.08 17.20
Leaf area 3.163 2.841 0.322 89.81 3.29 34.21
Leaves number 0.255 0.214 0.042 83.68 0.87 15.20
H2B= broad sense heritability, GA =genetic advance (5% of selection), GAM =genetic advance as percent of mean, 𝜹𝟐 g=
genetic variance, 𝜹𝟐 p =phenotypic variance, LWSP =low wilted seedling percentage, MNDL = minimum number of
defoliate leaves, MNYL = minimum number of yellow leaves

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Admikew Y. 892

CONCLUSION

Coffee wilt disease is a vascular disease caused by of parents in coffee (Coffea arabica L.). An MSC Thesis
Gibberella xylarioides Heim and Saccas. It becomes an presented to the school of graduate studies of Alemaya
increasing importance in Arabica coffee production. University, Ethiopia. 128p.
Testing of different Arabica coffee genotypes provide Bayetta B (2001). Arabica coffee breeding for yield and
valuable evidence in the development of CWD resistant resistance to coffee berry disease (Colleototrichum
variety (ies). The trail was conducted to identify promising kahawae sp. Nov). Doctoral dissertation submitted to
resistant genotypes, to estimate heritability and genetic the Wye University, London. 272p.
advance of CWD and growth traits.. CABI (2003). Surveys to assess the extent of coffee wilt
disease in East and Central Africa: Final technical
Among the genotypes under the test 279/71 (6.84%) report. CABI Regional Center, Nairobi, Kenya. 49p.
exhibited the lowest wilted seedling percentage, minimum ChalaJ, Girma A, Demelash T, AregaZ, Sihen B, and
number of defoliated leaves and yellow leaves per Adem A (2012). Development and release of coffee
seedling, extended incubation period, tall in height and berry disease resistant varieties to specialty coffee
wide leaf area. So, it was considered as a promising producing regions in Ethiopia: Proceedings of 24th
genotype to CWD resistance followed by 971 (8.60%), 974 international scientific colloquium on coffee (ASIC).
(23.33%) and 79233 (35.00%).These genotypes are Costa Rica, Jimma Agricultural Research Centre. pp.
important for inclusion in future resistance breeding 637-644.
programs. Furthermore, the estimation of high broad Demelash T (2013). Evaluation of Arabica coffee (Coffea
sense heritability coupled with GAM were observed for arabica L.) germplasm for major coffee disease with
wilted seedling percentage, incubation period, average special emphasis to coffee wilt disease (Gibberella
inter node length, leaf area and number of defoliated xylarioids) at Jimma, Ethiopia. An MSC Thesis
leaves per seedling; it could be improved easily through presented to the school of graduate studies of Jimma
selection. University.
Demelash T and Kifle B (2015). Evaluation of released
Arabica coffee varieties (Coffea arabica L.) for major
It can be concluded that promising CWD resistant coffee diseases with special emphasis to coffee wilt
genotypes were identified which should be evaluated disease (Gibberella xylarioides) at Jimma, Ethiopia.
further for CWD, other major diseases, yield and important Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare5
agronomic traits at multi-locations under open field (15):81-86.
conditions. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (2014). Analysis
of price incentives for coffee in Ethiopiafor the time
period 2005–2012: Technical notes series, MAFAP, by
REFERENCES Kuma Worako T, MasAparisi A and Lanos B. Rome.
Fehr WR (1987). Principles of cultivar development: theory
Acquaah G (2012). Principles of plant genetics and and techniques. Macmillan Publishing Company, New
breeding. John Wiley and Sons. 740p. York. 536p.
Agrios GN (2005). Plant pathology.USA, Elsevier Girma A. and Mengistu H (2000). Cultural characteristics
Academic Press. 922p. and pathogenicity of Gibberella xylarioides isolates on
Allard RW (1999). Principles of plant breeding.New York, coffee. Pest management Journal of Ethiopia, 4:11-18.
John Wiley and Sons. 254p. Girma A (2004). Diversity in pathogenicity and genetics of
Anthony F, Bertrand B, Quiros O, Wilches A, Lashermes Gibberella xyilarioides (Fusarium xylarioides)
P, BerthaudJand Charrier A (2001). Genetic diversity of population and resistance of coffee spp. in Ethiopia.
wild coffee (Coffea arabica L.) using molecular markers. Doctoral Dissertation presented to University of Bonn,
Euphytica 118(1):53-65. Germany. 81p.
Anthony F, Combes MC, Astorga C, Bertrand B, Graziosi Girma A, Million A, Hindorf H, Arega Z, Demelash T and
Gand Lashermes P (2002). The origin of cultivated Chala J (2009a). Coffee wilt disease in Ethiopia. In.
Coffea arabica L. varieties revealed by AFLP and SSR Flood J (eds.), Coffee wilt disease.UK, Manila and
markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104 (5):894- Philippines: Typeset by MTC. pp. 50-68.
900. Girma A,Biyesse D and Musoli PC (2009b). Host -
Arega Z (2006). Diversity of Arabica coffee population in pathogen interaction in Coffea- Gibberella xylariodes
afro-mountain rainforests of Ethiopia in relation to coffee patho-system. In. Flood J (eds.), Coffee wilt disease.
berry disease (Colletotrichum kahawae) and coffee wilt UK, Manila and Philippines: Typeset by MTC.pp.120-
disease (Gibberella xylarioids). An MSC thesis 136.
submitted to the school of graduate studies of Addis International Coffee Organization (2019). Coffee market
Ababa University, Ethiopia. 92p. report. http://www.ico.org/documents/cy2018-19/cmr-
Bayetta B (1991). Nursery evaluation of heterosis and 0719-e.pdf
combining ability in reference to origin and morphology

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 893
International Plant Genetic Resource Institute (1996). Tefera A (2015). Ethiopia: Coffee Annual Report. GAIN
Descriptors for coffee (coffea spp. and psilanthus spp). Report (number ET1514–26/5/2015). USDA Foreign
International plant Genetic Resources Institute. Rome, Agricultural Service. pp 6.
Italy. 38p. Van der Graaff NA and Pieters R (1978). Resistance levels
Jeger MJ and Viljanen-Rollinson SLH (2001). The use of in Coffea arabica to Gibberella xylarioides and distribution
the area under the disease-progress curve (AUDPC) to pattern of the disease. Neth. J.Pl. Pathol. 84: 117-120.
assess quantitative disease resistance in crop cultivars. Verma PS and Agarwal VK (1982). Genetics. New Delhi,
Theor. Appl. Genet. 102:32-40. Ramnagar: Chad, S. and Co. Ltd. 580p.
Kassahun H and Getnet G (2008). Performance, structure Viands DR (1985). Comparison of Maris Kabul with Vertus
and prospects of coffee marketing in Ethiopia. In. Girma alfalfa for resistance to verticillium wilt. Crop Sci. 25:1096-
A, Bayetta B, Tesfaye S, Taye K and EndaleT(eds.), 1100.
Coffee Diversity and Knowledge: Proceedings of a
national workshop four decades of coffee research and
development in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. pp.
416–423.
Kifle B, Demelash T and Gabisa G (2015). Screening of
some coffee Arabica genotypes against coffee wilt
diseases (Gibberella xylarioides Heim and Saccas).
International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural
Research 2(3): 66-76.
Labouisse JP, Bellachew B, Kotecha S, Bertrand B (2008).
Current status of coffee (Coffea arabica L.) genetic
resources in Ethiopia: implications for conservation.
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 55(7):1079.
Meyer FG (1965). Notes on wild Coffea arabica from
Southwestern Ethiopia, with some historical
considerations, Economic Botany19:136–151.
Olika K, Sentayehu A, Taye K and Weyessa G. (2011).
Variability of quantitative traits in limmu coffee (Coffea
arabica L.) in Ethiopia. International Journal of
Agricultural Research 6(6):482-493.
Phiri N and Baker P (2009). A synthesis of the work of the
Regional Coffee Wilt Programme 2000–2007. Coffee
Wilt Disease in Africa. Wallingford, United Kingdom.
CABI.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274389248
Pieters R and Van der Graaff NA (1980). Gebberrella
xyilarioides on Arabica coffee: evaluation of testing
methods and evidence for the horizontal nature of
Resistance. Neth. J. Pl. Path. 86:37-43.
Rachel Bickford (2019). Ethiopia: Coffee Annual Report.
GAIN Report. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service
(Number ET1904–5/29/2019). pp6.
Rutherford MA (2006). Current knowledge of coffee wilt
disease, a major constraint to coffee production in
Africa. Symposium on Fusarium induced diseases of Accepted 5 October 2020
tropical perennial crops. Phytopathology 96: 663–666.
Statistical analysis system (2011). SAS user’s guide Citation: Admikew Y (2020). Evaluation of Promising
(version 9.3). SAS Institute. USA, Cary, NC. Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant
Seyoum S (2003). Genetic divergence for seedling Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia.
parameters and associations among agronomic traits in International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science,
the Ethiopian coffee (Coffea arabica L.) germplasm. An 7(3): 885-893.
MSc thesis submitted to the School of graduate studies
of Alemaya University, Ethiopia. 91p.
Singh RK and Chaudhary BD (1985). Biometrical methods
in quantitative genetic analysis. New Delhi, Kalyani Copyright: © 2020: Admikew Y. This is an open-access
publishers. 318p. article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Sylvian PG (1955). Some observation on Coffea arabica Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
L. in Ethiopian. Turrialba 5:37-53. use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.

Evaluation of Promising Coffee Wilt Disease (Gibberella xylarioides) Resistant Arabica Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia