To learn more about the map elements, please download the "Pan-European strategy for genetic conservation of forest trees"
This distribution map has been developed by the European Commission Joint Research Centre (partly based on the EUFORGEN map) and released under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)
Caudullo, G., Welk, E., San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., 2017. Chorological maps for the main European woody species. Data in Brief 12, 662-666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2017.05.007
The following experts have contributed to the development of the EUFORGEN distribution maps:
Fazia Krouchi (Algeria), Hasmik Ghalachyan (Armenia), Thomas Geburek (Austria), Berthold Heinze (Austria), Rudi Litschauer (Austria), Rudolf Litschauer (Austria), Michael Mengl (Austria), Ferdinand Müller (Austria), Franz Starlinger (Austria), Valida Ali-zade (Azerbaijan), Vahid Djalal Hajiyev (Azerbaijan), Karen Cox (Belgium), Bart De Cuyper (Belgium), Olivier Desteucq (Belgium), Patrick Mertens (Belgium), Jos Van Slycken (Belgium), An Vanden Broeck (Belgium), Kristine Vander Mijnsbrugge (Belgium), Dalibor Ballian (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Alexander H. Alexandrov (Bulgaria), Alexander Delkov (Bulgaria), Ivanova Denitsa Pandeva (Bulgaria), Peter Zhelev Stoyanov (Bulgaria), Joso Gracan (Croatia), Marilena Idzojtic (Croatia), Mladen Ivankovic (Croatia), Željka Ivanović (Croatia), Davorin Kajba (Croatia), Hrvoje Marjanovic (Croatia), Sanja Peric (Croatia), Andreas Christou (Cyprus), Xenophon Hadjikyriacou (Cyprus), Václav Buriánek (Czech Republic), Jan Chládek (Czech Republic), Josef Frýdl (Czech Republic), Petr Novotný (Czech Republic), Martin Slovacek (Czech Republic), Zdenek Špišek (Czech Republic), Karel Vancura (Czech Republic), Ulrik Bräuner (Denmark), Bjerne Ditlevsen (Denmark), Jon Kehlet Hansen (Denmark), Jan Svejgaard Jensen (Denmark), Kalev Jðgiste (Estonia), Tiit Maaten (Estonia), Raul Pihu (Estonia), Ülo Tamm (Estonia), Arvo Tullus (Estonia), Aivo Vares (Estonia), Teijo Nikkanen (Finland), Sanna Paanukoski (Finland), Mari Rusanen (Finland), Pekka Vakkari (Finland), Leena Yrjänä (Finland), Daniel Cambon (France), Eric Collin (France), Alexis Ducousso (France), Bruno Fady (France), François Lefèvre (France), Brigitte Musch (France), Sylvie Oddou-Muratorio (France), Luc E. Pâques (France), Julien Saudubray (France), Marc Villar (France), Vlatko Andonovski (FYR Macedonia), Dragi Pop-Stojanov (FYR Macedonia), Merab Machavariani (Georgia), Irina Tvauri (Georgia), Alexander Urushadze (Georgia), Bernd Degen (Germany), Jochen Kleinschmit (Germany), Armin König (Germany), Armin König (Germany), Volker Schneck (Germany), Richard Stephan (Germany), H. H. Kausch-Blecken Von Schmeling (Germany), Georg von Wühlisch (Germany), Iris Wagner (Germany), Heino Wolf (Germany), Paraskevi Alizoti (Greece), Filippos Aravanopoulos (Greece), Andreas Drouzas (Greece), Despina Paitaridou (Greece), Aristotelis C. Papageorgiou (Greece), Kostas Thanos (Greece), Sándor Bordács (Hungary), Csaba Mátyás (Hungary), László Nagy (Hungary), Thröstur Eysteinsson (Iceland), Adalsteinn Sigurgeirsson (Iceland), Halldór Sverrisson (Iceland), John Fennessy (Ireland), Ellen O'Connor (Ireland), Fulvio Ducci (Italy), Silvia Fineschi (Italy), Bartolomeo Schirone (Italy), Marco Cosimo Simeone (Italy), Giovanni Giuseppe Vendramin (Italy), Lorenzo Vietto (Italy), Janis Birgelis (Latvia), Virgilijus Baliuckas (Lithuania), Kestutis Cesnavicius (Lithuania), Darius Danusevicius (Lithuania), Valmantas Kundrotas (Lithuania), Alfas Pliûra (Lithuania), Darius Raudonius (Lithuania), Robert du Fays (Luxembourg), Myriam Heuertz (Luxembourg), Claude Parini (Luxembourg), Fred Trossen (Luxembourg), Frank Wolter (Luxembourg), Joseph Buhagiar (Malta), Eman Calleja (Malta), Ion Palancean (Moldova), Dragos Postolache (Moldova), Gheorghe Postolache (Moldova), Hassan Sbay (Morocco), Tor Myking (Norway), Tore Skrøppa (Norway), Anna Gugala (Poland), Jan Kowalczyk (Poland), Czeslaw Koziol (Poland), Jan Matras (Poland), Zbigniew Sobierajski (Poland), Maria Helena Almeida (Portugal), Filipe Costa e Silva (Portugal), Luís Reis (Portugal), Maria Carolina Varela (Portugal), Ioan Blada (Romania), Alexandru-Lucian Curtu (Romania), Lucian Dinca (Romania), Georgeta Mihai (Romania), Mihai Olaru (Romania), Gheorghe Parnuta (Romania), Natalia Demidova (Russian Federation), Mikhail V. Pridnya (Russian Federation), Andrey Prokazin (Russian Federation), Srdjan Bojovic (Serbia) , Vasilije Isajev (Serbia), Saša Orlovic (Serbia), Rudolf Bruchánik (Slovakia), Roman Longauer (Slovakia), Ladislav Paule (Slovakia), Gregor Bozič (Slovenia), Robert Brus (Slovenia), Katarina Celič (Slovenia), Hojka Kraigher (Slovenia), Andrej Verlič (Slovenia), Marjana Westergren (Slovenia), Ricardo Alía (Spain), Josefa Fernández-López (Spain), Luis Gil Sanchez (Spain), Pablo Gonzalez Goicoechea (Spain), Santiago C. González-Martínez (Spain), Sonia Martin Albertos (Spain), Eduardo Notivol Paino (Spain), María Arantxa Prada (Spain), Alvaro Soto de Viana (Spain), Lennart Ackzell (Sweden), Jonas Bergquist (Sweden), Sanna Black-Samuelsson (Sweden), Jonas Cedergren (Sweden), Gösta Eriksson (Sweden), Markus Bolliger (Switzerland), Felix Gugerli (Switzerland), Rolf Holderegger (Switzerland), Peter Rotach (Switzerland), Marcus Ulber (Switzerland), Sven M.G. de Vries (The Netherlands), Khouja Mohamed Larbi (Tunisia), Murat Alan (Turkey), Gaye Kandemir (Turkey), Gursel Karagöz (Turkey), Zeki Kaya (Turkey), Hasan Özer (Turkey), Hacer Semerci (Turkey), Ferit Toplu (Turkey), Mykola M. Vedmid (Ukraine), Roman T. Volosyanchuk (Ukraine), Stuart A'Hara (United Kingdom), Joan Cottrell (United Kingdom), Colin Edwards (United Kingdom), Michael Frankis (United Kingdom), Jason Hubert (United Kingdom), Karen Russell (United Kingdom), C.J.A. Samuel (United Kingdom).
Status of Pinus pinaster conservation in Europe
Maritime pine typically shows high genetic diversity, such as in populations in southern Iberia (Salvador et al., 2000). The species includes several different subspecies and is found in a wide range of habitats with a wide variety in genetic diversity in different populations (Alía and Martín, 2003; Santos-del-Blanco et al., 2012). This results in wide adaptation in growth, survival, resistance to insects and drought, and adaptation to different climatic conditions, creating a high level of genetic differentiation (González-Martínez, Alía, and Gil, 2002). The authors suggest that this may be because the species rapidly adapted after the last glaciation to the recently available highly diverse ecological conditions where it could survive.
Maritime pine has a scattered and discontinuous distribution because of forest fires, habitat fragmentation, and human activity. High mountain ranges in south-western Europe also contribute to isolation of populations with close neighbours (González-Martínez, Alía, and Gil, 2002; De‐Lucas et al., 2009). This has created large genetic differences among populations at small and large spatial scales (Alía and Martín, 2003). Spatial genetic structuring in maritime pine is stronger in fragmented and small populations than in continuous ones, with fragmented populations being more genetically isolated (De‐Lucas et al., 2009).
There are three main genetic groups of maritime pine: Atlantic, circum-Mediterranean, and Maghrebian (González-Martínez, Alía, and Gil, 2002). All three groups are present in the Iberian Peninsula, suggesting this region contained multiple glacial refugia and was the centre of dispersal for the species (Salvador et al., 2000; González-Martínez, Alía, and Gil, 2002). Eastern Iberian populations have high genetic diversity but are highly differentiated from other Iberian populations, whereas Atlantic populations have a low level of genetic diversity and originated from eastern Iberian populations (Salvador et al., 2000). Extensive gene flow between populations occurs but they are still highly differentiated (González-Martínez, 2002). Varying environments cause different adaptive traits to be more favourable in different places, with regional differences in precipitation, temperature, and soil type being the best explanation of the high divergence between populations (González-Martínez, Alía, and Gil, 2002). However, the authors note that some populations showed low differentiation, probably because these populations rapidly and recently spread from glacial refugia.
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
No available information.
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Forest fires threaten isolated stands or small populations but have also been key in shaping the genetic structure of the species (Alía and Martín, 2003). However, land-use changes, such as converting forest land to agriculture or residential areas, reduces the species’ range and population size, threatening the loss of genetic diversity (Alía and Martín, 2003). The authors also note that over-exploitation, pests, diseases, insects, and global climate change shifting the species’ range further north also threaten genetic diversity of maritime pine. The introduction and use of exotic or cultivated varieties close to natural populations could cause genetic pollution due the species extensive gene flow, leading to the loss of local adaptivity (Alía and Martín, 2003).
Maritime pine has a high commercial value. As a result, there have been many studies into its genetics and therefore its genetic distribution is well known (Alía and Martín, 2003). Seed sources for in situ and ex situ conservation must be carefully selected based on the results of provenance trials and the main purpose of the plantation (protection, wood production) (Alía and Martín, 2003). These authors note that, given the breeding system of the species, special care must be taken to establish in situ conservation stands of sufficient size to reduce the effect of inbreeding and external contamination. Maritime pine produces large amounts of seed, meaning seed banks are a very effective form of ex situ conservation to preserve the adaptiveness of target populations (Alía and Martín, 2003).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Genetic Characterisation of Pinus pinaster and its GCUs
Availability of FRM
FOREMATIS
Pinus pinaster - Technical guidelines for genetic conservation and use for maritime pine
Publication Year: 2002Seed source selection
Taking into consideration the important differences in growth, stem form and adaptation of the different populations, seed source selection has to be carefully analyzed based on the results of provenance trials. Selection is dependent on the main objective of the plantation (protection, wood production, etc.), and in most countries descriptions of the base material are available to assist in selecting the most suitable for afforestation.
In situ conservation areas
These are the best means of preserving the adaptive potential of the species in the long term. Given the breeding system of the species, special care has to be taken to establish conservation stands of sufficient size to reduce the effect of inbreeding and external contamination. As in other conifers, areas greater than 20 ha are necessary to ensure enough regeneration to maintain the genetic variability of the species. A network of conservation areas covering the most contrasting areas in the distribution range of the species would be a method to preserve the natural stands of the species.
Ex situ conservation
This form of conservation is based on different activities, such as clonal banks, seed banks and plantations using seeds from the threatened populations. Clonal banks are mainly used in populations with large economic (or ecological) value. Seed banks are very effective methods of preserving the adaptiveness of the target populations, because of the heavy seed production in Maritime pine, and the possibility of conserving the seed (or pollen) for a prolonged period of time. At present there are many activities in different countries that could be considered as a starting point for the conservation of the species.
Contacts of experts
NA
Further reading
Aguiar, A., Almeida, M.H., and Borralho, N. 2003. Genetic control of growth, wood density and stem characteristics of Pinus pinaster in Portugal. Silva Lusitana, 11(2): 131–139.
Zas, R., Sampedro, L., Prada, E., and Fernández-López, J. 2005. Genetic variation of Pinus pinaster Ait. seedlings in susceptibility to the pine weevil Hylobius abietis L. Annals of Forest Science, 62(7): 681–688.
References
Alía, R. and Martín, S. 2003. EUFORGEN Technical Guidelines for genetic conservation and use for maritime pine (Pinus pinaster). Rome, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. 6 pages.
De‐Lucas, A.I., González-Martínez, S.C., Vendramin, G.G., Hidalgo, E., and Heuertz, M. 2009. Spatial genetic structure in continuous and fragmented populations of Pinus pinaster Aiton. Molecular Ecology, 18(22): 4564–4576.
González-Martínez, S.C., Alía, R., and Gil, L. 2002. Population genetic structure in a Mediterranean pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.): a comparison of allozyme markers and quantitative traits. Heredity, 89(3): 199–206.
Salvador, L., Alía, R., Agúndez, D., and Gil, L. 2000. Genetic variation and migration pathways of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait) in the Iberian Peninsula. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 100: 89–95.
Santos-del-Blanco, L., Climent, J., González-Martínez, S.C., and Pannell, J.R. 2012. Genetic differentiation for size at first reproduction through male versus female functions in the widespread Mediterranean tree Pinus pinaster. Annals of Botany, 110(7): 1449–1460.
See details
Designed by Newtvision
