Credit:
Credit:
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, Giovanni; Welk, Erik; San-Miguel-Ayanz, Jesús (2017). Chorological maps and data for the main European woody species. figshare. Collection. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.2918528
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).
Genetic structure in common cotoneaster ranges from populations that are entirely clonal to highly diverse populations, reflecting varying balances of asexual (apomictic) and sexual reproduction across its range (Bogunić et al., 2021). The asexually reproduced tetraploid variant is dominant in many areas, especially in Balkan populations, producing many identical clonal populations and lowering genetic diversity locally, while sexual diploids are present but rare (Bogunić et al., 2021). Where diploids and tetraploids variants of common cotoneaster both occur, genetic diversity might be expected to be higher. Overall, southern European populations (e.g. southern Balkans) hold the greatest genetic diversity and thus act as important reservoirs for the species (Bogunić et al., 2021).
Common cotoneaster shows some geographic genetic structuring in relation to ploidy patterning, i.e. the number of sets of chromosomes in a cell. Sexually reproducing diploid (cell containing two complete sets of chromosomes, one from each parent) populations occupy a restricted, relict distribution that likely reflects survival in Pleistocene glacial refugia, while asexually reproducing tetraploid (cell containing four complete sets of chromosomes) lineages have a broader, more widespread range, a pattern typical when clonally reproducing variants of a species with a different number of chromosomes expand more easily than their sexually reproducing relatives (Bogunić et al., 2021). The species is thus split into two main genetic groups: small, localized pockets of diploids (thought to be long-term refugial remnants) and extensive patches of tetraploids that have colonized larger areas (Bogunić et al., 2021).
Common cotoneaster is insect pollinated, with seeds distributed by birds and mammals. Gene flow is uneven and is low across large parts of the species’ range where reproduction is clonal.
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2025.
Common cotoneaster is part of the core Cotoneaster group and is a genetically distinct taxon, but its relationships and genetic diversity are shaped by frequent hybridization and polyploidy and apomixis, which blur species boundaries and make understanding its evolutionary history difficult (Li et al., 2014). Common cotoneaster is genetically similar to Cotoneaster raboutensis (typically referred to by its Latin name), suggesting recent shared ancestry or hybrid origins (Bartish, Hylmö, and Nybom, 2001). Where it is cultivated, hybridization is common and produces intermediate offspring, further complicating taxonomy, and conservation.
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2025.
Common cotoneaster faces genetic risks because much of its European distribution is restricted and patchy and many populations are dominated by clonal reproduction, reducing effective genetic diversity and adaptive potential. Clonality makes populations more vulnerable to disturbance, disease, and environmental change because many individuals are genetically identical and cannot adapt (Bartish, Hylmö, and Nybom, 2001; Bogunić et al., 2021). The loss of the few populations originating from sexual reproduction in long-term refugial gene reservoirs would be especially damaging for the species, limiting the long-term resilience of common cotoneaster. Research on the species’ genetics is limited, meaning threats are poorly understood and leaving conservation planning under-informed (Bartish, Hylmö, and Nybom, 2001; Li et al., 2014; Bogunić et al., 2021).
Management activities that prioritize the conservation of southern European diploid refugial populations originating from sexual reproduction are especially important to protect the genetic diversity of the species (Bogunić et al., 2021). Management actions should include targeted genetic monitoring (to map diploid versus tetraploid distributions and genotypic diversity), in situ protection of genetically rich sites, and ex situ germplasm banking with emphasis on sampling many individuals within populations (not just among populations) to capture local diversity (Bogunić et al., 2021). Research is urgently needed to understand the genetic diversity of common cotoneaster and inform seed-stand selection, restoration sourcing, and any assisted-migration or breeding plans (Bartish, Hylmö, and Nybom, 2001; Li et al., 2014; (Bogunić et al., 2021).
The bibliographic review was conducted by James Chaplin of the EUFORGEN Secretariat in August 2025.
Further reading
Macková, L., Nosková, J., Ďurišová, Ľ., and Urfus, T. 2020. Insights into the cytotype and reproductive puzzle of Cotoneaster integerrimus in the Western Carpathians. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 306(3): 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01684-6
References
Bartish, I.V., Hylmö, B., and Nybom, H. 2001. RAPD analysis of interspecific relationships in presumably apomictic Cotoneaster species. Euphytica, 120(2): 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017585600386
Bogunić, F., Siljak-Yakovlev, S., Mahmutović-Dizdarević, I., Hajrudinović-Bogunić, A., Bourge, M., Brown, S.C., and Muratović, E. 2021. Genome size, cytotype diversity and reproductive mode variation of Cotoneaster integerrimus (Rosaceae) from the Balkans. Plants, 10(12): 2798. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10122798
Li, F., Fan, Q., Li, Q., Chen, S., Guo, W., Cui, D., and Liao, W. 2014. Molecular phylogeny of Cotoneaster (Rosaceae) inferred from nuclear ITS and multiple chloroplast sequences. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 300(6): 1533–1546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-014-0980-5
If you notice any error in the contents of this species page, please contact euforgen@efi.int
See details
Designed by Newtvision
