Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

DOI 10.1007/s10722-008-9380-4

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Agro-morphological diversity of Spanish traditional melons

(Cucumis melo L.) of the Madrid provenance
Sandra Escribano Æ Almudena Lázaro

Received: 5 May 2008 / Accepted: 7 October 2008 / Published online: 22 November 2008
Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Abstract The variability of 14 landraces belonging conserved as valuable genetic resources to enrich the
to a Madrilean village historically specialized on Inodorus genetic bases for future breeding proposes
melon cultivation, Villaconejos, was evaluated based worldwide. Furthermore, it should be considered the
on 58 quantitative and qualitative morphological opportunity of promoting their cultivation under the
traits. These landraces were compared to a reference shelter of a Protected Geographical Indication as a
array composed of 14 accessions which represented high quality melon. Finally, the discovering of such a
the main varieties cultivated in Spanish fields. Indi- high variability presented in a very small area, gives a
vidual data related to plant, fruit, seed and phenology clue for focusing, with an elevated probability of
have been analysed using a multivariate analysis. success, future surveys in similar ancestral European
This analysis showed intra- and inter-varietal diversity, villages which in the past times, also supplied more
as emphasized the most discriminant morphological populated cities with their farming products.
traits in order to define similarities. Villaconejos
accessions were morphologically distinct from the Keywords Cucumis melo
Landraces

reference accessions (RA). Only the landraces belong- Morphological characterization

ing to Piel de Sapo market class showed common Multivariate analysis
morphological affinities with the RA, grouping with
them. The majority of Villaconejos traditional varie-
ties clustered in five different groups, with no RA
within, showing distinctive morphological singulari- Introduction
ties not described previously. Two of these groups
showed some particularities in fruit traits, which are
appreciated as quality marks for Spanish consumers. Cultivated melon (Cucumis melo L.; 2n = 2x = 24)
These results indicate that these accessions must be is a morphologically diverse, outcrossing horticul-
tural crop of wide economic importance, member of
the genus Cucumis belonging to the Cucurbitaceae
S. Escribano (&)
A. Lázaro family (Kirkbride 1993). Since melon varies in leaf,
IMIDRA (Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y
plant and fruit characters, it was initially subdivided
Desarrollo Rural, Agrario y Alimentario), Autovı́a A-II,
Km 38200, 28800 Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain into 10 groups or botanical varieties by Naudin
e-mail: [email protected] (1859), and then more recently reclassified into seven
A. Lázaro horticultural groups by Munger and Robinson (1991).
e-mail: [email protected] Two of these groups, Cantalupensis (Muskmelon)

123
482 Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

and Inodorus (Casaba and Honeydew), due mostly to designed and developed a rigorous molecular and
their sweet flesh, are of commercial interest in morphological appraisal of the collection housed at
Europe, the United States and in many Mediterranean the Experimental Station ‘La Mayora’, representative
and Asiatic countries (McCreight et al. 1993). The of other regional Spanish collections that have their
diverse fruit morphology among horticultural types origins in the botanical surveys conducted between
within groups allows their grouping into specific 1984 and 1985.
market classes such as Charentais, Ogen, Shipper, About 6% of the Spanish production of melon is
Galia, Rochet and Piel de Sapo. cultivated in the Madrid provenance where, further-
Melon has been grown in Spain since early Roman more, it is the most important crop species. Despite
times. Although the primary center of melon diver- the importance of industry and services to the
sification is India; Spain is considered a secondary regional economy, this region has had an extended
center (McCreight et al. 1993). Agricultural produc- farming history. Due to its closeness to the central
tion of melon in Spain is nearly 1.086 million markets, many orchards were traditionally developed
tons/year (MAPA 2005), being a major world by riversides in this area to provide fresh food for the
producer of both Group Cantalupensis and Group Madrilean consumers.
Inodorus cultivars (McCreight et al. 1993). The A good example of a village completely devoted to
morphological characteristics of melon production a specific agronomical production is a small rural
focused on small domestic markets, mostly Casaba community named Villaconejos which exists about
market classes (Group Inodorus), vary from market 50 km south of Madrid. Its name has achieved
types produced in other European areas (Staub et al. national prominence for its unique landrace cultivars
2000). Their shape ranges from globular to elliptical; of melon which originated in the nineteenth century.
their skin can be smooth or wrinkled, with diverse The local farmers cultivated, conserved and
colored epidermis (dark green, green, yellow, white, exchanged their seeds between neighbors for later,
etc.) and a white or green flesh (Gómez-Guillamón carrying the best fruits to the most popular markets in
et al. 1985; Nuez et al. 1986). Examples of Spanish Madrid. Apart from these vicinal exchanges, all other
cultivars which are commonly present in national melon germplasm introductions seem to have been
markets include Piel de Sapo (green skin with dark sporadic. The special sensorial attributes of these
green spots), Tendral (dark green skin which is landraces (i.e., taste, juiciness and sweetness) initially
wrinkled and thick) and Amarillo (yellow skin) (Nuez received local consumer acceptance, and then
et al. 1994). There are also some other traditional national notoriety, when the origin trademark ‘Villa-
cultivars with very particular morphological traits, conejos’, was a synonymous of exceptional quality
these fruits are not extended through Spain, they are melons. Nowadays, these traditional varieties have
grown every year in familiar plots or distributed in been replaced with new and high productive
local farmer markets. These landraces are always improved varieties, consigning to forgetfulness these
linked with the culinary tradition of the families ancient varieties, being cultivated apart from now
belonging to a precise village. only by farmers in their familiar plots as self-supply.
Esquinas-Alcázar (1977) studied the alloenzyme Actually, only the preference of the farmers for these
variation and relationships in the genus Cucumis to local old cultivars has avoided their complete
evaluate the genetic diversity of Spanish melons. replacement during the last years. But recent tenden-
These data defined later the high degree of melon cies, such as the reduction of rural population and
genetic erosion (Esquinas-Alcázar and Gulick 1983). abandoning of traditional agricultural practices will
This report led to accomplish many botanical expe- lead to an irreversible genetic erosion of these
ditions and an assessment of the major Spanish melon landraces.
germplasm collections. These actions resulted in an Despite of the several characterizations already
extensive morphological description of Spanish mel- mentioned of Spanish collections, and despite of their
ons, and the clustering of the accessions into unique historical importance and retention a rigorous anal-
Casaba cultivars (Gómez-Guillamón et al. 1983a, b, ysis of variation in Villaconejos melon landraces with
1985; Molina et al. 1986; Nuez et al. 1986, 1988, previous morphological studies, has not been per-
1994; Garcı́a et al. 1998). In 2003, López-Sesé et al. formed (Escribano et al. 2007)

123
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497 483

In the present study, a multidisciplinary approach Evaluation trials

was initiated to provide a comparative assessment of
Villaconejos melon diversity and fruit quality. There- All samples were sowed in the experimental station ‘El
fore, we sought to determine if these landraces differ Encı́n’, belonging to the IMIDRA. The essays were
from among themselves and other madrilean and carried out during the summers of 2005, 2006 and
Spanish accessions using morphological analysis 2007. Experimental evaluation plots consisted of 12
methods. These morphological methods, basis of rows of 24 m long (two plots par row), with a distance
the traditional systematic are completely irreplace- of 2.5 m between rows and 0.8 m between samples.
able in terms of studying a genetic resource (Konopka Transparent plastic was used for avoiding the weeding
and Hanson 1985) and are completely required for growth; anyhow, plots were hand-weeded when nec-
accomplishing the initial evaluation of its diversity essary. Located irrigation was applied once par day
and the accurate identification of these local land- during the first week after sowing and frequently
races. This identification could be useful to preserve throughout the fruit growth.
the genetic variability, as well as to encourage their
use and to provide new economical sources to
farmers. Simultaneously, the evaluation of the Agro-morphological evaluation
genetic variability focused on traits of economic
interest is useful for choosing the proper material for All accessions were examined for a set of 22
genetic improvement in international breeding quantitative, 34 qualitative and 2 phenologic charac-
programs. ters (days to flowering and days to maturity) used as
descriptors, recommended by the IPGRI (2003), with
minor adaptations for some traits. The nomenclature
Material and methods of mature fruit morphology of melon accessions used
herein was previously articulated by Esquinas-Alcázar
Plant material and Gulick (1983) and reviewed by López-Sesé et al.
(2003). The quantitative and qualitative data in plant
Twenty eight accessions were examined (Table 1). and fruit were measured in 15 plants and 20 fruits per
Villaconejos’s accessions are conserved at the Madri- accession. Color measurements were determined
lean Institute of Rural, Agrarian and Alimentary using the Royal Horticultural Society Color Chart
Research and Development (IMIDRA), Madrid, (RHSCC). Days to flowering and maturity characters
Spain. Three of them were collected in 1971 and were scored when those phenologic stages reached
1984. Other eight traditional varieties were kindly the 50% of the plants or fruits.
donated by farmers in collecting missions accom-
plished in 1995. Ultimately, the three landraces,
‘Azul’, ‘Mochuelo Tradicional’ and ‘Piel de Sapo Agro-climatic and soil characterization
Tradicional’, were obtained the last year, as part of an
ethnobotanical research. The experimental station clime is classified as
All these landraces were compared with a standard Temperate Mediterranean (TE, Me) with (av) winter
reference array consisting of nine commercial vari- type and (M) summer type according to Papadakis
eties and five landraces cultivated in other madrilean agro-climatic classification (Papadakis 1975; INIA
villages. This array represented samples of differing 1997). Climatic information was recorded from the
geographical cultivation belonging to the two botan- weather station network elaborated by the IMIDRA.
ical groups most cultivated in Spain (Cantalupensis The station is located in 40°310 N, 3°170 W, 610 m a.s.l
and Inodorus). Commercial samples were obtained and three climate data were considered: maximum
from seed companies and the landraces from the and minimum absolute temperature and mean rainfall
seed-bank of the Plant Genetic Resources Centre from May to September in 2005, 2006 and 2007.
(CRF) of the National Institute of Agriculture and With regard to the soils, ‘El Encı́n’ belongs to the
Food Research and Technology (INIA), and the alluvial terrace type, order Alfisol, Suborder Xeralf,
Horticultural Seed-Bank of Zaragoza (BGHZ). Group Haploxeralf (INIA 1997).

123
 Table 1 The 28 melon (Cucumis melo L.) varieties, including reference array accessions from different Spanish seeds companies and Villaconejos’s landraces
484

IDa IMIDRA accession CRF accession Accession nameb Groupc Market Class Seed sourcee Latitude Longitude Altitude Collection Seed
number number dated collectore

123
1 1113 – Piel de Sapo Inodorus (RA) Casaba (Piel de SC – – – – SC
Ricamiel Sapo)
2 1 – Largo Negro Escrito – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 1995 FD
3 2 – Mochuelo – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 1971 Esquinas-
Alcázar
4 3 BGE032272 Melón Tempranillo – – Chinchón 400833 N 0032516 W 753 2000 CRF
5 4 – Puchero – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 1995 FD
6 5 – Amarillo de – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 1995 FD
Villaconejos
7 1112 – Piñonet Pinet Inodorus (RA) Casaba (Piel de SC – – – – SC
Sapo)
8 6 – Pata Negra – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2002 FD
9 7 – Felipe – – Alcalá de 402853 N 0032205 W 587 1995 FD
Henares
10 8 – Alfonso – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2002 FD
11 9 – Reyes – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2002 FD
12 69 BGE 025561 Melón Largo – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 1984 Esquinas-
Alcázar
13 70 BGE 004126 Melón de – – Alcalá de 402853 N 0032205 W 587 1971 Esquinas-
Villaconejos Henares Alcázar
14 1111 – Amarillo Canario Inodorus (RA) Casaba (Yellow SC – – – – SC
Canari)
15 120 BGE035702 Melón Tendral – – Titulcia 400821 N 0033405 W 509 2002 CRF
Negro
16 121 BGE037043 Melón de Invierno – – Patones 405222 N 0032928 W 832 2003 CRF
17 122 – Melón Escrito de – – Torrelaguna 404952 N 0033215 W 744 2005 FD
Torrelaguna
18 – – Vulcano Cantalupensis Charentais SC – – – – SC
(RA)
19 – – Yalo Inodorus (RA) Casaba (Yellow) SC – – – – SC
20 – – Masada Cantalupensis Galia SC – – – – SC
(RA)
21 AD-04 Cantalupensis Ananás SC – – – – SC
(RA)
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497
 Table 1 continued
IDa IMIDRA accession CRF accession Accession nameb Groupc Market Class Seed sourcee Latitude Longitude Altitude Collection Seed
number number dated collectore

22 124 BGE014893 Melón Moscatel – – Pedrezuela 404448 N 0033607 W 800 1987 BGHZ
Normal
23 123 BGE014892 Melón Verde – – Pedrezuela 404448 N 0033607 W 800 1987 BGHZ
24 – – Sancho Inodorus (RA) Casaba (Piel de SC – – – – SC
Sapo)
25 125 – Mochuelo – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2006 FD
Tradicional
26 126 – Piel de Sapo – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2006 FD
Tradicional
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

27 153 – Melón Azul – – Villaconejos 400618 N 0032904 W 650 2006 FD

28 – – Tendral Inodorus (RA) Casaba SC – – – – SC
(Tendral)
a
Identification number used in the characterization
b
Local name given by the farmer or commercial name given by the company
c
RA = Reference accession
d
NA = Information non-available
e
CRF = Plant Genetic Resources Centre; SC = seeds company; FD = farmer’s donation; BGHZ = horticultural seed-bank of Zaragoza
485

123
486 Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

Data analysis fruit. Regarding to the qualitative characteristics, we

could find fruit shapes from flattened and globular
Descriptive statistic analyses were used to outcome (e.g., ‘Mochuelo’) to elongate (e.g., ‘Largo Negro’).
an initial morphological description within the land- Colors ranged from orange (e.g., ‘Tempranillo’),
races. To provide for a joint analysis of qualitative yellow (e.g., ‘Amarillo de Villaconejos’) to almost
and quantitative variables, qualitative characters were black (e.g., ‘Largo Negro’) and skin patterns from
expressed as absence (0) or presence (1) when the smooth (e.g., ‘Felipe’) to intense wrinkled (e.g.,
character was scored as a nominal characteristic, or as ‘Puchero’). The majority of the accessions presented
quantitative scale in which the highest value repre- from perceptible to medium corked skin, which
sented the highest intensity of the character. The represents a mark of quality in Spanish green
standardized original data-matrix was used in order cultivars (López-Sesé et al. 2003). Primary fruit color
to estimate the morphological diversity. A KMO was a distinguishing feature among accessions, and
(Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) analysis was performed to secondary skin color often varied resulting in differ-
indicate if an adequate plant sampling was executed. ent designs. For instance, fruit of some accessions
Afterward, a PCA (Principal Component Analysis) possessed dark green spots speckled on a yellowish
was used to reduce multidimensional data sets to green-skinned background, typical from Piel de Sapo
lower dimensions, and the total of variation explained cultivars. Likewise, yellow spots were found speck-
(TVE) was calculated as the sum of extracted led in a green skin, commonly observed in Rochet
Eigenvalues, as the correlation coefficients between type. After reviewing previous studies based on
the first three Principal Components (Fi) and the Spanish varieties, it seems that we can find morpho-
morphological characters. These correlation coeffi- logical characters in common among Villaconejos
cients were additionally employed to estimate the varieties and others located in different regions (Nuez
negative or positive correlation index between char- et al. 1996; López-Sesé et al. 2003). Nevertheless,
acters. The taxonomic distances among accessions Villaconejos varieties presented some peculiarities:
showed the distance indicators between pairs of even if ‘Mochuelo’, ‘Felipe’ or ‘Melón de Villacone-
landraces. An unweighted pair group method with jos’ landraces showed characteristics of a Rochet
arithmetic mean (UPGMA) employed these taxo- type, these landraces possessed a very specific corked
nomic distances to construct dendrograms. As the design around the blossom scar (star-shaped) accom-
characterization was carried on during three cultiva- panied by a golden speckled. Besides, their fruit
tion seasons, we developed three clusters. A Mantel shape was globular or even flattened, their skin was
test was outcome in order to study the correlation very smooth and their secondary color tended to grey
between them. An ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) shades. ‘Puchero’ was a landrace which shared
was executed, applying a Tuckey test, to provide the characteristics with a Tendral type, even so, its
significative differences between accessions, years, almost black principal color, elevated weight, pro-
and years 9 accessions. nounced wrinkled and longitudinal corked
distribution made it very singular. There were two
accessions, ‘Largo Negro’ and ‘Largo Negro Escrito’,
Results and discussion both very elongate and narrow, with extremely
pointed ends and almost black color. There is no
During cultivation period, the temperatures in the melon type published previously with all these
experimental field ranged from 0 to 40°C, and the characteristics, only the ‘Rayado’ (Nuez et al. 1996)
rainfall did not exceed 150 mm in the complete can be morphologically similar, nevertheless their
season. complete absence of stripped bands did not permit
Studied varieties showed some plant characters in their inclusion in this fruit type. The landrace
common, inherent to the Inodorus and Cantalupensis ‘Tempranillo’, globular and ovate, very small, with
groups: pentalobate leaves, medium depth lobes, dark orange skin and flesh color, even easy abscission of
green color, andromonoecious sex type and yellow the peduncle after ripening, did not still adjust to the
flowers. Fifty-eight polymorphic traits showed a large characteristics of a Cantalupensis type because of the
range of variability between the accessions mostly in absence of ribs, very pointed blossom end shape and

123
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497 487

Fig. 1 Cluster analysis of

28 Spanish accessions (see
Table 1) by UPGMA
grouped using taxonomical
distances

longitudinal corked distribution. Only the melon type Variation index within accessions were also found.
‘Desertnaya’ (Nuez et al. 1996) could be similar, but The morphological traits with more variance were
the white flesh of this already defined type did not usually related to the fruit. We could observe a very
permit the insertion of ‘Tempranillo’. high variance in one of the accessions obtained from
Villaconejos landraces showed also a large vari- Pedrezuela (Madrid), named ‘Melón Verde’. This
ability in quantitative traits comparing to previous variance was exceeding the 51.45% of the range of
studies. E.g., the mean fruit weight for a collection of variation in almost all the characters. Coming back to
125 Spanish accessions was 1.5 kg (López-Sesé et al. the data notes, we found out very contradictory
2003), while the mean fruit weight in Villaconejos results. There was a huge broad range of colors (from
landraces was 2.08 kg (including the landrace white to dark green), shapes, corked distribution and
‘Tempranillo’, with a mean weight of 1.10 kg). The metric data. Our conclusion was that its seeds were
average fruit width for the Spanish accessions was mixed accidentally during the collecting expedition
12 cm, whereas the Villaconejos accessions width or in its place of conservation (Pedrezuela). There-
mean was 15 cm. Moreover, the highest variability in fore, it was not taken into account for any other
fruit weight, attending to the collection of Spanish discussion. Considering all the other varieties, with
varieties, was in white (Blanco) accession, only from regard to the variation within morphological traits,
0.8 to 2.9 kg. The same quantitative trait reached a fruit weight, corked skin distribution, position of the
range of variability in Villaconejos accessions from maximum fruit width and blossom end shape of the
0.53 to 4.95 kg. Villaconejos variability was surpris- fruit were the most variable. On the other hand, ease
ing, not only because no more than fourteen landraces of peduncle separation, presence of secondary color
presented further variability than a sample of 125 and its distribution were almost constant traits within
Spanish accessions collected in the whole country accessions. As expected, commercial accessions had
(López-Sesé et al. 2003), also due to the fact that all a very low variance within their characters, but we
Villaconejos landraces were collected in a region could also find some traditional varieties with very
with a extension of only 36.5 km2, a very small area, low variance: ‘Largo Negro’ (only 4.85% of varia-
and they have been conserved simply by local tion), ‘Mochuelo Tradicional’ (4.42%), ‘Melón de
farmers during all these years. Villaconejos’ (8.60%) and ‘Largo Negro Escrito’

123
488 Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

(8.81%). The variance percentage in these landraces Table 2 Correlation coefficients between the first three
was even lower than some variation percentages Principal Components (Fi) and the morphological characters
founded in commercial varieties, e.g., ‘Piel de Sapo Character F1 F2 F3
Ricamiel’ (9.30%), ‘Piñonet Pinet’ (11.92%), Cumulative contribution 14.82% 27.79% 38.74%
‘Tendral’ (13.59%) and ‘Amarillo Canario’ (19.46%).
Hypocotyl length 0.1279 -0.0898 0.7880
This result could be due to a very careful conserva-
Cotyledon width 0.1384 -0.0714 0.6098
tion given by the farmer to these landraces, or to the
Number of nodes/main branch -0.2201 -0.0382 0.5587
fact that the seeds collected proceed from very few
Leaf length 0.6800 -0.0658 0.3156
quantity of fruits, so the genetic pool was very
Leaf width 0.5185 -0.0712 0.3804
narrow. On the contrary, we could find several
Leaf undulation 0.2606 0.5526 -0.0928
varieties with a high variance: ‘Pata Negra’
Leaf petiole attitude -0.6172 0.0838 -0.0992
(16.84%), ‘Amarillo de Villaconejos’ (14.52%),
Fruit length 0.8492 0.1576 0.0773
‘Tempranillo’ (13.03%), ‘Alfonso’ (11.68%), ‘Puchero’
(11.03%), ‘Felipe’ (11.98%), and ‘Reyes’ (10.51%). Fruit diameter 0.2238 -0.6023 0.1566
The two Villaconejos yellow skin accessions, Fruit weight 0.7232 -0.1692 0.1041
‘Tempranillo’ and ‘Amarillo de Villaconejos’, Fruit shape 0.6770 0.6389 0.0613
showed a high variance in skin color. Nevertheless, Fruit after maturity color 0.3393 -0.0158 -0.6990
this trait did not indicate almost any variance in the Fruit secondary color 0.1663 -0.1466 -0.6074
distribution
other landraces. This could mean that the skin color
Fruit spots intensity 0.5019 0.3564 0.5156
characteristic is much more fixed in green or dark
Fruit peduncle width 0.2047 -0.5545 0.2009
green melon types. Likewise, the fruit shape charac-
Fruit ease of peduncle 0.6036 -1.4650 -0.0670
ter showed much less variation in elongated
separation
melons (e.g., ‘Largo Negro’, ‘Largo Negro Escrito’,
Fruit blossom end shape -0.4744 -0.6306 0.0436
‘Puchero’) than in globular ones (e.g., ‘Mochuelo’).
Fruit stem end shape -0.5508 -0.6830 0.0065
The KMO analysis performed on the all accessions
Fruit wrinkled intensity 0.5865 0.4269 -0.1268
morphological data resulted in a value of 0.67, which
Fruit corked intensity 0.2653 0.0667 0.7491
indicated an adequate plant sampling, allowing us to
Fruit corked distribution -0.1239 -0.0879 0.6241
effectuate the PCA analysis.
Fruit striped bands color 0.3722 -0.2124 -0.5608
This analysis divided the accessions along three
Fruit flesh outer layer color 0.5607 -0.0533 -0.4346
axes which explained the 38.74% of the total
Seed width 0.7423 -0.2269 -0.1282
variability (Table 2). The 1st factorial axe accounted
Days to flowering 0.5476 -0.1165 -0.4605
for 14.82% of the total variation, and it was mainly
defined by fruit length, days to maturity and fruit Days to maturity 0.8791 0.1523 -0.1035
weight. The 2nd factorial axe accounted for 12.97%
of the total variation and it was correlated with ease was negatively correlated with a very pronounced
of peduncle abscission and fruit shape. The 3rd corked and its netted distribution. The traits best
factorial axe accounted for 10.95% and it was correlated with these axes helped us to determinate
associated with fruit colors and its skin pattern. The the most important morphologic characters for an
PCA analysis showed a positive correlation among identification and comprehensive description of fruit
leaf, fruit and seed size plus melon growing cycles. types (Tables 3, 4).
However, there was a negative correlation among A dendrogram based on the entire morphological
these characters and a flattened blossom and stem end data was performed (Fig. 1). As the experiment was
shape. It could additionally be found a negative carried on during three years, we developed three
correlation between the longitudinal character in fruit different clustering related to the 2005, 2006 and
shape and the ease of peduncle separation. In 2007 seasons. According to the Mantel test, 2006 and
addition, there was a negative correlation between 2007 were the most correlated, with a value of 81.7%.
vegetative characters (hypocotyls length and cotyle- On the contrary, 2005 and 2007 got in a lower rate,
don width) and a dark and spotty mature melon. At only 69.1%. Finally, the correspondence between
the same time, a predominant very dark fruit color 2005 and 2006 reached 74.6%. These small

123
 Table 3 Mean. standard deviation and extremes of each metric morphological character for the 13 groups of melon landraces and reference accessions
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Group 8 Group 9 Group 10 Group 11 Group 12 Group 13

Hypocotyl length (cm) Mean 4.80 5.25 5.55 5.46 6.72 5.17 5.03 6.60 4.19 6.53 5.66 5.44 3.26
Standard 1.31 1.11 1.52 0.94 1.43 1.26 1.45 1.50 0.83 0.84 1.62 1.45 0.76
deviation
Minimum 1.20 2.81 2.20 3.86 3.50 2.00 3.00 4.43 3.20 3.94 2.50 3.40 2.00
Maximum 8.10 7.50 8.74 6.71 10.50 7.00 9.00 11.00 5.80 8.28 8.53 7.78 5.00
Cotyledon width (cm) Mean 2.12 2.25 2.35 2.53 2.32 2.22 2.13 2.40 2.41 2.47 2.09 2.08 1.49
Standard 0.34 0.39 0.29 0.17 0.31 0.45 0.37 0.38 0.32 0.42 0.21 0.30 0.42
deviation
Minimum 0.50 1.10 1.80 2.27 1.80 0.90 1.50 1.70 2.10 0.60 1.75 1.40 0.90
Maximum 3.00 3.80 3.00 2.75 3.20 3.00 3.00 3.10 3.00 3.07 2.60 2.57 2.20
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

Leaf length (cm) Mean 18.87 18.53 19.64 21.09 19.53 18.14 18.16 18.36 20.06 18.12 18.70 15.46 16.62
Standard 2.07 1.99 1.02 0.80 2.03 2.56 2.12 1.67 1.05 1.99 1.60 2.19 1.65
deviation
Minimum 13.00 13.00 17.80 18.80 12.00 11.50 12.00 14.00 18.30 13.80 14.70 11.50 12.00
Maximum 23.50 29.10 21.80 22.00 24.00 22.50 21.00 20.40 22.00 21.80 20.50 19.20 19.50
Fruit length (cm) Mean 22.11 19.05 22.52 24.43 24.15 25.03 17.57 21.64 21.40 15.37 34.81 14.27 17.57
Standard 3.57 3.06 3.30 3.26 2.68 5.03 2.78 1.28 4.47 1.62 3.93 3.33 19.54
deviation
Minimum 11.40 10.40 12.40 18.40 16.60 15.80 11.00 20.00 10.20 12.10 28.10 8.50 10.51
Maximum 29.20 25.00 33.30 27.40 29.30 32.00 22.30 24.20 26.00 19.40 44.20 21.70 12.20
Fruit diameter (cm) Mean 14.76 15.91 14.62 14.12 12.94 14.83 15.09 17.89 15.56 15.74 15.31 11.98 13.69
Standard 2.04 2.81 1.89 1.54 1.36 2.84 2.71 1.73 1.33 6.21 1.01 2.57 1.26
deviation
Minimum 9.20 10.00 9.80 12.80 10.20 9.50 8.80 15.00 12.80 11.10 13.00 7.50 10.60
Maximum 21.50 23.20 19.00 16.70 15.90 19.80 18.50 20.90 17.30 19.90 17.40 16.20 16.90
Fruit weight (kg) Mean 2.40 2.45 2.22 2.50 1.89 2.64 1.83 3.12 2.45 1.81 3.72 1.10 1.36
Standard 0.86 1.01 0.68 1.19 0.49 1.27 0.73 0.53 0.32 0.49 0.78 0.62 0.34
deviation
Minimum 0.48 0.53 0.54 1.24 0.85 0.62 0.41 2.33 1.90 0.84 2.60 0.27 0.62
Maximum 4.31 4.95 3.98 4.12 3.14 4.45 2.92 3.96 2.95 3.11 5.26 2.40 1.92
489

123
490 Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Group 8 Group 9 Group 10 Group 11 Group 12 Group 13
divergences could be due to annual environmental
changes which usually affect to morphological traits,
1.79
0.39

1.20
2.60

1.95
87.42

86
90
mostly the quantitative ones.
In spite of the level of confidence given by these
Mantel test results, and mostly to make sure the
1.22
0.19

1.00
1.50

1.01
77.00

76
78
validity of the groupings of the final dendrogram, an
analysis of variance, ANOVA, was executed. The
120.95
2.19
0.25

1.55
2.50

1.03
analysis revealed significant differences among

120
122
accessions, but not among years. No significative
differences related to year 9 accession were found
neither. Attending to the morphological traits studied
84.50
1.99
0.21

1.62
2.70

0.77

and according to the Tuckey test, all of them

83
85

presented significative differences among accessions

2.04
0.21

1.76
2.30

0.00
110.00

(P B 0.05).
110
110

The average taxonomic distance (TD) among

Villaconejos accessions based on quantitative and
2.26
0.27

1.71
2.70

0.96
88.67

qualitative traits was TD = 1.34, ranging from

88
90

TD = 0.71 (most related landraces, ‘Alfonso’ and

‘Reyes’) to 1.83 (most distantly related, ‘Puchero’
105.38
2.14
0.28

1.61
2.59

0.49

105
106

and ‘Tempranillo’). In fact, ‘Tempranillo’ accession

was most distant from any one particular accession
108.78
2.47
0.24

2.03
2.99

1.49

examined (on average between any other accession,

107
110

TD = 1.73), ranging from TD = 1.50, with ‘Pata

Negra’ accession, to TD = 2.16, the highest average,
108.68
2.26
0.22

1.87
2.96

2.71

with ‘Melón de Invierno’ (including the RA). In

106
112

contrast, the landrace Alfonso was the most similar to

any melon, possessing an average of TD = 1.21
1.91
0.62

1.00
2.70

0.00
101.00

between it and any other accession.

101
101

A large number of nodes were created, showing

102.71
2.13
0.23

1.50
2.54

3.64

that mostly of the Villaconejos landraces were

97
106

grouped apart from the RA. These results revealed

that there were numerous and significatively distinct
2.23
0.28

1.68
2.93

5.08
93.88

morphological characteristics within these landraces

85
102

that we could not find in an array of fourteen RA

representative of Spanish markets.
103.02
2.33
0.35

1.20
3.24

5.06

Attending to the dendrogram, the first two groups

96
115

that we could clearly separate were a largest one

composed by ten accessions, and a shorter one
composed only by four. Their taxonomical distance
deviation

deviation
Maximum

Maximum

(TD = 1.19) was approximately the mean TD of the

Minimum

Minimum
Standard

Standard

28 varieties (TD = 1.22). The first group was con-

Mean

Mean

formed by five landraces of Villaconejos and five RA,

all of them belonging to the Piel de Sapo type. Two
of these accessions, ‘Piel de Sapo Ricamiel’ and
Table 3 continued

Seed width (cm)

‘Sancho’, acted as a barrier of the cluster. The fruits

Daysto maturity

belonging to this cluster were characterized by ovate

or elliptical shape, a range of color from dark green to
yellowish green, very pronounced and big spots
distributed through the whole fruit, rounded blossom

123
 Table 4 Class partition and frequencies of the principal non metric character for the 13 groups of landraces and reference accessions
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Group 8 Group 9 Group 10 Group 11 Group 12 Group 13

Fruit shape 1:Flattened 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.32
2:Globular 0.01 0.44 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.90 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.50 0.61
3:Ovate 0.35 0.46 0.03 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.10 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.06
4:Elliptical 0.56 0.04 0.48 0.33 0.02 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5:Elongate 0.07 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.98 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
Fruit after maturity 1:Blackish green 0.10 0.25 0.00 0.50 0.60 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
color 2:Dark green 0.15 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Greyed green 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4:Green 0.40 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

5:Pale green 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
6:Yellowish 0.19 0.27 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
green
7:Light yellow 0.04 0.00 0.32 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.54 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
8:Yellow 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
9:Light orange 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.32 0.00
10:Orange 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.68 0.00
11:Dark orange 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00
12:Grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Fruit secondary 0:Absent 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.50 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
color 1:Speckled 0.07 0.63 0.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.00
distribution
2:Spotted 0.93 0.38 0.32 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Striped 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Fruit spots 0:Absent 0.04 0.03 0.68 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
intensity 1:Superficial 0.10 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2:Perceptible 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Intermediate 0.32 0.21 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
4:Pronounced 0.53 0.19 0.25 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fruit ease of 0:Very difficult 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
peduncle 1:Easy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00
abscission
2:Very easy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 1.00
491

123
 Table 4 continued
492

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Group 8 Group 9 Group 10 Group 11 Group 12 Group 13

123
Fruit blossom end 1:Very pointed 0.31 0.02 0.63 0.33 1.00 0.92 0.19 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.95 0.70 0.00
shape 2:Pointed 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Rounded 0.65 0.65 0.25 0.33 0.00 0.04 0.73 0.07 0.30 0.12 0.05 0.00 0.32
4:Flattened 0.03 0.33 0.11 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.93 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.30 0.68
Fruit stem end 1:Very pointed 0.59 0.03 0.57 0.33 0.88 0.84 0.58 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.00
shape 2:Pointed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Rounded 0.38 0.24 0.43 0.50 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.83 0.80 0.20 0.05 0.95 0.00
4:Flattened 0.03 0.73 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.05 1.00
Fruit wrinkled 1:Very 0.03 0.82 0.00 0.33 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.65 0.00
intensity superficial
2:Superficial 0.28 0.17 0.17 0.33 0.65 0.00 0.44 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.90
3:Intermediate 0.48 0.01 0.32 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.10
4:Pronounced 0.21 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.10 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00
5:Very 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.00
pronounced
Fruit corked 1:Very 0.06 0.15 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
intensity superficial
2:Superficial 0.16 0.39 0.18 0.33 0.00 0.09 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Intermediate 0.43 0.41 0.46 0.33 0.01 0.09 0.08 1.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00
4:Pronounced 0.34 0.05 0.23 0.00 0.36 0.71 0.03 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00
5:Very 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.33 0.63 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
pronounced
Fruit corked 1:Low dotted 0.46 0.26 0.48 0.33 0.01 0.32 0.55 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.83 0.13 0.77
distribution 2:Dotted 0.08 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.23
3:Longitudinal 0.38 0.72 0.38 0.33 0.44 0.57 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00
4:Netted 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5:High netted 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.33 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.23 0.00
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497
 Table 4 continued
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Group 8 Group 9 Group 10 Group 11 Group 12 Group 13

Fruit striped bands 0:Ausence 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00
color 1:Blackish green 0.62 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2:Dark green 0.15 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Greyed green 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4:Yellowish 0.23 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
green
5:Greenish 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
yellow
6:Light yellow 0.00 0.14 0.34 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
7:Yellow 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

8:Light orange 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
9:Grey 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Fruit flesh outer 0:White 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
layer color 1:Blackish green 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2:Dark green 0.10 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3:Yellowish 0.72 0.66 0.57 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.52 0.47 0.00 1.00
green
4:Light yellow 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00
5:Yellow 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00
6:Light orange 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00
7:Dark orange 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00
493

123
 494

123
Fig. 2 Mature fruit melons (Cucumis melo L.) representative of each cluster (see Fig. 1) characterized in the present study
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497 495

Fig. 3 Scatter diagram of 23

the first three principal 2 16
components for the melon
landraces morphologically 21
12
characterized 15

22
19 5
4
14
28 1
6 10 17
11 24
20
13
26

9
27
7
8
3
25

18
F2
F1

end shape and very pointed stem end shape. Usually result of a Piel de Sapo melon type improvement
intermediately wrinkled and corked. With a maxi- carried out in the last years, in order to adapt these
mum length and diameter of 29.20 and 21.50 cm, fruits to the consumer requirements (Fig. 3).
respectively, some fruits could even reach 4.31 kg The second group was only composed of four
weight (Fig. 2). All these characteristics are distinc- Villaconejos landraces; between globular and ovate,
tive from a Piel de Sapo type defined previously even flattened, their color ranged from blackish green
(Nuez et al. 1996; López-Sesé et al. 2002, 2003; to yellowish green, always with a very particular
Staub et al. 2004), and, despite of the significative golden speckled secondary color distribution, in
differences among accessions, there was a clear diverse intensities. A transversal corked distribution
separation between these melons and all the other gives them a mark of quality required by the
types. This could mean that the Piel de Sapo traits are traditional farmer. With a mean length of 19.05 and
fully linked among themselves. The most distantly a diameter mean of 15.91, their weight ranged around
connected variety was ‘Sancho’. Currently, this 2.45 kg, but with a broad standard deviation, they
commercial variety occupies almost the complete could reach 4.95 kg weight. Only a Rochet type
cultivation field in Villaconejos municipality. Never- melon can be close to these morphological charac-
theless, its taxonomical distance TD = 1.17 with any teristics (Nuez et al. 1996), but, as we discussed
other Piel de Sapo type, was almost the distance before, some of its traits can not be found in previous
between the Piel de Sapo melon type cluster and the studies (star-shape, flattened stem end shape, grey
second group (TD = 1.19). Attending to its morpho- speckled). Reviewing previous studies, López-Sesé
logical characteristics, these melons seemed to be the presented in 2003 two accessions also named ‘Mo-
biggest, the heaviest, the darkest and the most chuelo’ and collected in Madrid provenance, which
elongated ones. Moreover, its flesh width mean was were clustered in two different groups, one as green
much bigger than the other landraces means. These type (4G-190) and other one as Rochet type (4R-
results corresponded with the fact that this variety is a 122). We could suspect a strong similarity between

123
496 Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497

the ‘Mochuelo’ accessions and the Villaconejos 1.83 kg. Nevertheless, we founded important simi-
landraces belonging to this group, since they were larities between this Villaconejos landrace and some
collected in the same province, and with the same Spanish landraces belonging to the Yellow type (in
local name. particular Group A), described previously by Nuez
Taking as reference of division the partition et al. (1996). This result could indicate a probable
between the first and the second group, the next spread of its seeds or fruits to other Spanish locations
groups was composed by only one or two accessions. in the last century, since the varieties studied by Nuez
These groups were: et al. were collected in several Spanish regions, but
Group 3: Created by two accessions, the RA not in Madrid.
(reference accession) ‘Amarillo Canario’ (Yellow Group 12: The landrace ‘Tempranillo’ com-
type) and the madrilean accession ‘Tendral Negro’. pounded this node. As discussed before, and
This last one did not present yellow type character- confirmed herein after clustering, its very particular
istics, neither tendral ones (according to Nuez et al. morphological characteristics did not let any RA
1996) (e.g. the ‘Tendral Negro’ showed spots distri- cluster with it.
bution and colors typical from a Piel de Sapo type). Groups 8, 9 10, 11 and 13 were built by RAs: No
Reviewing all the morphological traits, it seemed that Villaconejos accessions clustered with any of them.
this accession has a mistake in the classification and After this clustering review we may consider that
does not belong to the tendral type. It will need to be the yellow skin could not be the main trait which
reviewed by the donator (CRF). defines a group, although previously reported (Esqu-
Group 4: Formed by ‘Melón Verde’, the accession inas-Alcázar and Gulick 1983; Gómez-Guillamón
previously discussed as unacceptable as a RA due to et al. 1983a, b, 1985; Nuez et al. 1986, 1988, 1994,
the fruits irregularities. 1996; Molina et al. 1986; López-Sesé et al. 2003).
Group 5: Composed by two Villaconejos acces- The presence or absence of this trait does not define a
sions, ‘Largo Negro Escrito’ and ‘Largo Negro’. group when studied with many other morphological
These two accessions were very correlated characters as size, shape or corked distribution, so it
(TD = 0.82). This result confirmed what was dis- does not seem to be linked with any other trait (as,
cussed before, because of their particularities, there e.g., dark spots over a green skin in Piel de Sapo
was not RA able to cluster with these two accessions. type). Other explanation could be the presence of
Group 6: Only one accession, ‘Puchero’, built this some introgressions among foreign material. Future
group. Again, and as discussed previously, its singu- molecular analysis could be helpful to strengthen one
larity was reaffirmed after this analysis possessing a or both conclusions.
cluster on its own. The only similarity remarkable A wide variability has been found in a very small
with this accession was the correlation with the 5th area but with a vast historical importance in melon
clustering, ‘Largo Negro’ and ‘Largo Negro Escrito’, farming. Apart from the variability within the land-
with a taxonomical distance of TD = 1.26. Actually, races, it has been proved the significant differences
they shared very important traits as extraordinary between these traditional varieties and a reference
elongation, pointed blossom and end shape and dark array composed by other Madrilean and Spanish
skin. But the extremely wrinkled skin of ‘Puchero’ varieties. The landraces also showed morphological
separated it from the other group. particularities which have not been described previ-
Group 7: ‘Amarillo de Villaconejos’ configured ously and which represent a mark of melon quality in
this group. It is a very light yellow skin melon; there several regions of Spain
was neither a reference accession with morphological Present study confirmed the necessity of preserv-
characteristics similar enough to share a cluster with ing these irreplaceable genetic resources and
it. Mostly ovate, with a rounded blossom end shape continuing its study with complementary methods.
and a very pointed stem end shape, their intermediate It should be also considered to promote their recover
wrinkled intensity and superficial corked distribution to our markets, probably under the shelter of a PGI
and intensity were presented with a greenish yellow (Protected Geographical Indication), in order to
striped bands color. With a mean length of 17.57 and create an economical opportunity for the local
15.09 cm of diameter, their mean weight was farmers.

123
Genet Resour Crop Evol (2009) 56:481–497 497

As an additional conclusion, the high level of Kirkbride JH Jr (1993) Biosystematics monograph of the genus
diversity founded in Villaconejos, took as example of Cucumis (Cucurbitaceae). Parkway Publishers, Boone,
North Carolina
a village which supplied a big city with its products, Konopka J, Hanson J (eds) (1985) Information, handling sys-
could be also a clue to plan where to focus future tems for genebank management. IPGRI
collecting surveys, due to the fact that there should be López-Sesé AI, Staub JE, Katzir N, Gómez-Guillamón ML
several villages through Spain and Europe which (2002) Estimation of between and within accession varia-
tion in selected Spanish melon germplasm using RAPD and
were, a long time back, also specialized in certain SSR markers to assess strategies for large collection eval-
farming products for providing more populated cities. uation. Euphytica 127:41–51. doi:10.1023/A:1019904
It seems necessary to explore all those ancient areas, 224170
since, as showed herein, the probabilities of discov- López-Sesé AI, Staub JE, Gómez-Guillamón ML (2003)
Genetic analysis of Spanish melon (Cucumis melo L.)
ering in their surrounds ancestral genetic resources germplasm using a standardized molecular-marker array
are much higher. and geographically diverse reference accessions. Theor
Appl Genet 108:41–52. doi:10.1007/s00122-003-1404-z
Acknowledgements Financial support from European MAPA (2005) Anuario de Estadı́stica Agraria. Ministerio de
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) & INIA (Spanish Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. Madrid, Spain
Institute for Agro Food Research) project RTA2006-00083- McCreight JD, Nerson H, Grumet R (1993) Melon, Cucumis melo
00-00. L. In: Kallos G, Bergh BO (eds) Genetic improvement of
vegetable crops. Pergamon Press, New York
Molina RV, Cuartero J, Gómez-Guillamón ML, Abadı́a J,
Nuez F (1986) Variabilidad inter e intracultivar en melón.
Actas del II Congreso Nacional de la SECH. Córdoba, 21–
References 25 Abril 1986, pp 1293–1300
Munger HM, Robinson RW (1991) Nomenclature of Cucu-
Escribano S, Sánchez FJ, Salces R, Lázaro A (2007) mis melo L. Cucurbit Genet Coop Rep 14:43–44
Caracterización morfológica de variedades tradicionales Naudin C (1859) Review des cucurbitacées cultivées on
del melón de Villaconejos. Actas XI Congreso SECH. Museum. Ann Sci Natl Ser 4 Bot 12:79–164
Albacete, 23–27 Abril 2007, pp 61–64 Nuez F, Anastasio G, Cortés C, Cuartero J, Gómez-Guillamón
Esquinas-Alcázar JT (1977) Alloenzyme variation and rela- ML, Costa J (1986) Germplasm resources of Cucu-
tionships in the genus Cucumis. PhD Dissertation, mis melo L. from Spain. Cucurbit Genet Coop Rep 9:60–
University of California, Davis 63
Esquinas-Alcázar JT, Gulick PJ (1983) Genetic resources of Nuez F, Ferrando C, Dı́ez MJ, Costa J, Catalá MS, Cuartero J
Cucurbitaceae. A.G.P.G.R. I.B.P.G.R. 83/84:20. Rome et al (1988) Collecting Cucumis melo L. in Spain.
Garcı́a E, Jamilena M, Alvarez JI, Arnedo T, Oliver JL, Lozano Cucurbit Genet Coop Rep 11:54–56
R (1998) Genetic relationships among melon breeding Nuez F, Prohens J, Dı́ez MJ, Fernández de Córdova P (1994)
lines revealed by RAPD markers and agronomic traits. Cucumis melo L. accessions of the gene bank of the
Theor Appl Genet 96:878–885. doi:10.1007/s001220 Polytechnic University of Valencia. Cucurbit Genet Coop
050815 Rep 17:57–60
Gómez-Guillamón ML, Cuartero J, Cortés C, Abadı́a J, Costa Nuez F, Prohens J, Iglesias A, Fernández de Córdova P (1996)
J, Nuez F (1983a) Descripción de cultivares de melón: Catálogo de semillas de melón. Banco de Germoplasma
caracteres cuantitativos. Actas I del Congreso Nacional de de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia. Instituto
la Sociedad Española de Ciencias Hortı́colas. Valencia, 28 Nacional de Investigación y Tecnologı́a Agraria y Ali-
Noviembre–1 Diciembre 1983, pp 453–460 mentaria. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación
Gómez-Guillamón ML, Cuartero J, Cortés C, Abadı́a J, Costa Papadakis J (1975) Climates of the world, their agricultural
J, Nuez F (1983b) Descripción de cultivares de melón: potentialities. Ed Albatros, Buenos Aires, Argentina
caracteres cualitativos. Actas I del Congreso Nacional de Staub JE, Danin-Poleg Y, Fazio G, Horejsi T, Reis N, Katzir N
la Sociedad Española de Ciencias Hortı́colas. Valencia, 28 (2000) Comparative analysis of cultivated melon groups
Noviembre–1 Diciembre 1983, pp 453–460 (Cucumis melo L.) using random amplified polymorphic
Gómez-Guillamón ML, Abadı́a J, Cuartero J, Cortés C, Nuez F DNA and simple sequence repeat markers. Euphytica
(1985) Characterization of melon cultivars. Cucurbit 115:225–241. doi:10.1023/A:1004054014174
Genet Coop Rep 8:39–40 Staub JE, López-Sesé A, Fanourakis N (2004) Diversity among
INIA (1997) ‘El Encı́n’ Suelo y clima. Dpto de Ecologı́a, melon landraces (Cucumis melo L.) from Greece and their
CRIDA 06. Tajo, Madrid, Spain genetic relationships with other melon germplasm of
IPGRI (2003) Descriptor for melon (Cucumis melo L.). Inter- diverse origins. Euphytica 136:151–166. doi:10.1023/
national Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy B:EUPH.0000030667.63614.bd

123