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 Pyrus pyraster conservation in Europe
Most genetic analysis of European wild pear has focused on domesticated varieties, but wild populations have been shown to have high genetic diversity even in small populations, with most genetic diversity being within populations (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003; Wolko et al., 2014). Genetic differentiation between populations is low and there is no correlation between genetic and geographic distance in European wild pear populations in Europe (Wolko et al., 2014). A lack of genetic structuring, low genetic differentiation, and low levels of inbreeding indicates that gene flow between populations is high and is an important element determining the genetic structure of wild pear populations (Wolko et al., 2014). The species shows self-incompatibility, which promotes outbreeding and results in a high number of heterozygotes in the species (Wolko et al., 2010).
European wild pear widely distributed and grows in a variety of environments. This has resulted in high phenotypic variation and a high degree of polymorphism (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003; Wolko et al., 2010). European wild pear populations often grow in the presence of domestic cultivars (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003). Natural wild pear populations and cultivars have similar levels of genetic diversity but there is moderate genetic variation between them (Wolko et al., 2014; Reim et al., 2017).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
The pear (Pyrus spp.) genus contains between 20 and more than 74 wild or domesticated species, depending on definition, all of which are indigenous to Europe, Asia, and the mountainous regions of North Africa (Wolko et al., 2010; Wolko et al., 2014). It is difficult to know the exact number of pear species and define them taxonomically because they easily cross-pollinate and hybridize, have extensive morphological heterogeneity in individuals, and there are many cultivated and intermediate forms with ambiguous taxonomic status (Wolko et al., 2014). The existence of many cultivars, species, subspecies, hybrids, and clones demonstrates the need for genetic characterization of the species in Europe (Wolko et al., 2014). High morphological heterogeneity in European wild pear is the result of regular crossbreeding with cultivated varieties and hybridization with the common pear (Pyrus Communis), which European wild pear shares haplotypes with (Wolko et al., 2014). However, there is clear genetic differentiation between the common pear and European wild pear (Reim et al., 2017).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
European wild pear occurs rarely and thus has a narrow genetic base, potentially causing genetic drift in the species (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003). Hybridization with cultivated pear varieties could lead to a decline in the genetic diversity of European wild pear (Wolko et al., 2014). Other threats include a lack of natural regeneration, grazing, and uncontrolled seed transfer as wild pear is not included under national legislation for forest reproductive material and seeds of unknown origin are often used in afforestation (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003).
In situ conservation is difficult for European wild pear because of its occurrence as single individuals or in small groups; ex situ conservation in seed orchards is thus more suitable and efficient (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003). Natural regeneration can be supplemented by planting seedlings from seed orchards, extending the genetic base of the species (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003). Collecting and planting scattered individuals from a large ecologically similar area together into seed orchards also allows the establishment of new effective breeding populations (Stephan, Wagner, and Kleinschmit, 2003).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Genetic Characterisation of Pyrus pyraster and its GCUs
Availability of FRM
FOREMATIS
Malus sylvestris and Pyrus pyraster - Technical guidelines for genetic conservation and use for wild apple and pear
Publication Year: 2003The natural situation of these rare fruit tree species and their occurrence as single individuals or in small groups, restricts the possibilities for implementing in situ conservation strategies. For both species, the establishment of ex situ conservation seed orchards seems to be the most suitable and efficient conservation measure to undertake.
Natural regeneration should be supplemented by planting of seedlings originating from seed orchards. This method extends the genetic base of regeneration, which is important for future adaptability.
Grafting is not difficult and seed orchards can be relatively easily established. A minimum of 50 clones per seed orchard and region should be selected. New breeding populations can be restored when individual specimens, scattered over a large, but ecologically similar area, are collected and planted together in the seed orchard.
Noble Hardwood Network: Report on the fourth and fifth meeting
Noble Hardwoods Network: Report of the second meeting
Noble Hardwoods Network: Report of the first meeting
Contacts of experts
NA
Further reading
Bell, R.L. and Itai, A. 2010. Pyrus. In: C. Kole, ed. Wild crop relatives: genomic and breeding resources: temperate fruits, pp. 147–177. Berlin, Springer.
Wagner, I. and Büttner, R. 2016. Hybridization in wild pear (Pyrus pyraster) from various regions in Germany and from Luxembourg with respect to Pyrus × communis. Acta Horticulturae, 1242: 427–434. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2019.1242.61
References
Reim, S., Lochschmidt, F., Proft, A., Wolf, H., and Wolf, H. 2017. Species delimitation, genetic diversity and structure of the European indigenous wild pear (Pyrus pyraster) in Saxony, Germany. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 64: 1075–1085.
Stephan, B.R., Wagner, I., and Kleinschmit, J. 2003. EUFORGEN Technical Guidelines for genetic conservation and use for wild apple and pear (Malus sylvestris and Pyrus pyraster). Rome, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. 6 pages.
Wolko, Ł., Antkowiak, W., Lenartowicz, E., and Bocianowski, J. 2010. Genetic diversity of European pear cultivars (Pyrus communis L.) and wild pear (Pyrus pyraster (L.) Burgsd.) inferred from microsatellite markers analysis. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 57: 801–806.
Wolko, Ł., Bocianowski, J., Antkowiak, W., and Słomski, R. 2014. Genetic diversity and population structure of wild pear (Pyrus pyraster (L.) Burgsd.) in Poland. Open Life Sciences, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/biol-2015-0003
See details
Designed by Newtvision
