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 Quercus coccifera conservation in Europe
Most genetic variation of kermes oak is within populations, because of mutations, genetic recombination, and local adaptation to diverse ecological conditions. In Tunisia, 76.1% of the total genetic variation was found within populations and only 23.9% among populations (Flihi et al., 2022). However, this still indicates a high level of differentiation between populations, suggesting mating often occurs within subpopulations, which promotes the diversity between populations (Flihi et al., 2022).
The genetic differentiation and genetic structure of kermes oak is high compared with other wind-pollinated species in Tunisia. Geographic barriers do not affect the genetic structure, as indicated by the lack of significant relation between geographical distance and genetic difference, suggesting the species formed as the result of recent range expansion (Toumi and Lumaret, 2010; Flihi et al., 2022). In Tunisia, small and degraded populations of kermes oak and increased isolation of populations has resulted in wide within-population diversity, increasing between-population genetic diversity, but also resulting in increased genetic erosion, which reduces the adaptability potential of the species to changing environments (Flihi et al., 2022). The variation in Tunisian kermes oak populations suggests that they may contain unique and valuable germplasm able to support conservation and genetic improvement programmes (Flihi et al., 2022).
Sclerophyllous oaks, which include the kermes oak, have experienced hybridization and repeated range contractions and expansions because of glacial activity in the Quaternary (Rubio de Casas et al., 2009). Kermes oak had multiple genetic refugia in Iberia during the Last Glacial Maximum, facilitating allopatry. This isolation of populations contributed to the species’ current genetic differentiation and structure, resulting in alleles being lost and the creation of complex genetic diversity patterns (Rubio de Casas et al., 2009). Differentiation is also the result of short seed dispersal distance and limited movement of pollinators, causing low gene flow and significant genetic differentiation (Flihi et al., 2022). This also leads to the observation of phenotypic variations as the result of kermes oak populations adapting to different local environments and having a high level of genetic plasticity, allowing it to colonize north-east Iberia and survive in suboptimal niches (Rubio de Casas et al., 2009).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Morphological description of the species can be difficult due to frequent hybridization and gene flow with other species such as holm oak (Quercus ilex) and golden oak (Quercus alnifolia) (Flihi et al., 2022). Hybridization makes a significant contribution to kermes oak populations and creates individuals with a mixture of morphological traits from the two species (Rubio de Casas et al., 2009; Ortego and Bonal, 2010). This is the result of limited genetic barriers between kermes oak and other oak species, and the frequent occurrence of the species in mixed stands.
There is a clear difference in the genetic structure of eastern and western populations of kermes oak, indicating distinct evolutionary histories or, potentially, two morphological types, coccifera and calliprinos in the eastern and western Mediterranean respectively, with morphological differences in height and leaf characteristics (Toumi and Lumaret, 2010). Calliprinos is sometimes used as a synonym for kermes oak, but it could also refer to another group of coccifera found in the east Mediterranean, sometimes referred to as Palestinian oak (Toumi and Lumaret, 2010).
Some research suggests the golden and kermes oak in Cyprus should be classified as the same species, but as of now they are recognized as a separate species (Neophytou et al., 2007). Analysis of mixed stands of kermes oak and golden oak in Cyprus shows active but limited genetic introgression and hybridization between the two species (Neophytou et al., 2007). Due to its more limited ecological range in Cyprus, golden oak has less genetic variation than kermes oak and thus also less morphological variation.
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.
Genetic Characterisation of Quercus coccifera and its GCUs
Availability of FRM
FOREMATIS
Contacts of experts
NA
Further reading
Flihi, J., Rhimi, A., Yangui, I., Messaoud, C., and Ben ElHadj Ali, I. 2022. Correction to: Genetic diversity and population structure of Tunisian wild kermes oak (Quercus coccifera L.): Assessment by ISSR molecular markers and implication for conservation. Molecular Biology Reports, 49: 10141–10141.
References
Flihi, J., Rhimi, A., Yangui, I., Messaoud, C., and Ben ElHadj Ali, I. 2022. Genetic diversity and population structure of Tunisian wild kermes oak (Quercus coccifera L.): Assessment by ISSR molecular markers and implication for conservation. Molecular Biology Reports, 49: 6215–6224.
Neophytou, Ch., Palli, G., Dounavi, A., and Aravanopoulos, F.A. 2007. Morphological differentiation and hybridization between Quercus alnifolia Poech and Quercus coccifera L. (Fagaceae) in Cyprus. Silvae Genetica, 56: 271–277.
Ortego, J. and Bonal, R. 2010. Natural hybridisation between kermes (Quercus coccifera L.) and holm oaks (Q. ilex L.) revealed by microsatellite markers. Plant Biology, 12: 234–238.
Rubio de Casas, R., Vargas, P., Pérez-Corona, E., Cano, E., Manrique, E., García-Verdugo, C., and Balaguer, L. 2009. Variation in sclerophylly among Iberian populations of Quercus coccifera L. is associated with genetic differentiation across contrasting environments. Plant Biology, 11: 464–472.
Toumi, L. and Lumaret, R. 2010. Genetic variation and evolutionary history of holly oak: A circum-Mediterranean species-complex [Quercus coccifera L./Q. calliprinos (Webb) Holmboe, Fagaceae]. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 290: 159–171.
If you notice any error in the contents of this species page, please contact euforgen@efi.int
See details
Designed by Newtvision
