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 pubescens conservation in Europe
Downy oak has high genetic diversity, demonstrated by a high diversity of haplotypes across Europe, many of which are shared with sessile oak (Quercus petraea) and pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Italian populations were shown to have high genetic diversity and heterozygosity, likely because Italy was a glacial refuge and gene flow between Italian populations is high (Di Pietro et al., 2020). High gene flow may also explain why Italian populations showed no genetic differentiation (Di Pietro et al., 2020).
Sessile oak only recolonized Europe 12 000 years ago, having been restricted during the last glacial maximum to the Iberian, Italian and Balkan peninsulas (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Recolonisation of Europe from different glacial refugia has created some genetic structuring in the species (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Seed dispersal by small rodents and birds is effective, but seed and pollen dispersal in downy oak is still restricted, to as little as 40 m from the parent tree, which creates spatial genetic structuring in many downy oak forests (Chybicki et al., 2012).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Related oak species can typically hybridize easily, creating fertile offspring, which allows them to adapt to local and variable environments and occupy different niches (Chybicki et al., 2012). As a result of its ability to hybridize with various oak species, downy oak has a wide distribution range that includes most of central and southern Europe. However, downy oak shows genetic separation from other oak species across its range despite introgression and a high rate of hybridization rates in downy oak populations (Chybicki et al., 2012). For example, the authors found a high rate of hybridization between downy oak and sessile oak in mixed stands in Italy, although genetic evidence for introgression between the two species is low. Hybridization, inbreeding, and genetic drift creates a wide variation in downy oak morphology, making it difficult to distinguish specific taxa and the differences between them even through genetic analyses (Pasta, De Rigo, and Caudullo, 2016).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
The natural distribution of downy oak has been reduced and many forest areas converted to plantations, with many remaining downy oak forests having been overharvested and overgrazed since the start of human settlement (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Other threats to genetic diversity include climate change, indiscriminate cutting, poor silvicultural management, fires, intensive game management, and defoliation by pests and diseases (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019).
Efforts to conserve downy oak genetic diversity should prioritize endangered and marginal populations and identifying large populations and those with high genetic diversity in ecologically diverse regions to allow dynamic conservation units to be established based on long-term autochthony (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). The authors recommend in situ conservation methods but note that downy oak has been managed in coppiced systems over long periods and this can decrease genetic diversity. Therefore, conversion of coppiced systems to high forests could be an effective way to conserve genetic diversity (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). If in situ conservation is not sufficient, ex situ conservation should be used to preserve genetic diversity in the species (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Where artificial regeneration is necessary, local material adapted to conditions at the regeneration site should be used unless it is inferior (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019). Alternatively, downy oaks high adaptability and climate change could facilitate the species spread into new environments further north and make assisted migration a viable management approach (Bordács, Zhelev, and Schirone, 2019).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2024.
Genetic Characterisation of Quercus pubescens and its GCUs
Availability of FRM
FOREMATIS
Quercus pubescens - Technical guidelines for genetic conservation of Pubescent oak
Publication Year: 2019Similarly to other related oak species, in situ conservation methods should generally be preferred also for Q. pubescens. Pubescent oak grows well in a high-forest system which would by itself be an effective measure for species protection. Nevertheless, due to its good resprouting ability, the coppice system has been predominantly used for ages. Decrease of genetic resources is a serious risk when concentrating exclusively on coppices. This system, with 1000–2000 stumps/ha, coppicing rotations of about 30–50 years and preserving at least 80 seed-bearing trees/ha, is suggested for small private farms, and where the soils are degraded, or with incompletely favourable ecological conditions.
Coppice conversion to high forests requires 170–200 seed-bearing trees/ha. A good compromise would be to leave 80–130 stumps with just one single stem and adopt longer rotations for coppicing (50–80 years).
When artificial regeneration is carried out according to the principles of genetic conservation, then the following requirements for the use of reproductive material must be observed:
If in situ methods are not sufficient, additionally, ex situ conservation programmes should be used as well in order to preserve the endangered gene pool. Ex situ programmes should be adapted and specified to the local conditions to incorporate genetic conservation criteria into forestry management in order to guarantee the genetic quality of the materials used in plantations.
Pubescent oak might have an increasing role in its present and potential future distributional range, due to its adaptive potential. The forest-steppe and sub-mediterranean climate is predicted to be the dominant climate in some regions of Central Europe. In such climatic belts the forests are usually composed of Q. pubescens s.l. and/or its natural hybrids. Since limited genetic information about Q. pubescens is available, it is recommended that genetic conservation programmes start with the following objectives: conservation of endangered, marginal populations and habitats of Q. pubescens; sampling the genetic diversity; establishment of Dynamic Conservation Units based on long term autochthony, high biodiversity value and location in ecologically diverse regions of large populations (> 1000 individuals).
Similarly to other related oak species, in situ conservation methods should generally be preferred also for Q. pubescens. Pubescent oak grows well in a high-forest system which would by itself be an effective measure for species protection. Nevertheless, due to its good resprouting ability, the coppice system has been predominantly used for ages. Decrease of genetic resources is a serious risk...
Mediterranean Oaks Network: Report of the first meeting
Mediterranean Oaks Network: Report of the second meeting
Social Broadleaves Network: Report of the third meeting
Social Broadleaves Network: Report of the second meeting
Social Broadleaves Network: Report of the fifth meeting (Temperate Oaks and Beech network)
Social Broadleaves Network: Report of the first meeting
Contacts of experts
NA
Further reading
Wellstein, C. and Spada, F. 2015. The status of Quercus pubescens Willd. in Europe. In: E. Box and K. Fujiwara, eds. Warm-temperate deciduous forests around the northern hemisphere, pp. 153–163. Cham, Switzerland, Springer.
References
Bordács, S., Zhelev, P., and Schirone, B. 2019. EUFORGEN Technical Guidelines for genetic conservation and use of pubescent oak (Quercus pubescens). Bonn, Germany, European Forest Genetic Resources Programme. 6 pages.
Chybicki, I.J., Oleksa, A., Kowalkowska, K., and Burczyk, J. 2012. Genetic evidence of reproductive isolation in a remote enclave of Quercus pubescens in the presence of cross-fertile species. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 298: 1045–1056.
Di Pietro, R., Di Marzio, P., Antonecchia, G., Conte, A.L., and Fortini, P. 2020. Preliminary characterization of the Quercus pubescens complex in southern Italy using molecular markers. Acta Botanica Croatica, 79(1): 15–25.
Pasta, S., De Rigo, D., and Caudullo, G. 2016. Quercus pubescens in Europe: distribution, habitat, usage, and threats. In: J. San-Miguel-Ayanz, D. de Rigo, G. Caudullo, T.H. Durrant, and A. Mauri, eds. European atlas of forest tree species, pp. 156–157. Luxembourg, Publication Office of the European Union.
If you notice any error in the contents of this species page, please contact euforgen@efi.int
See details
Designed by Newtvision
