Genetic diversity of wild roses (Rosa spp.) in Europe, with an in-depth morphological study of Flemish populations

Both morphological and molecular-genetic marker analyses were used to identify the valuable populations in order to conserve the present-day gene pool of the wild roses in Europe. Therefore we aimed to expand the knowledge of the taxonomical complexity within the subgenus Rosa, especially within the section Caninae, and to examine the intraspecific differentiation within and among the European and Flemish populations. Our genetic results supported the subdivision of the European subgenus Rosa into several sections and the unique and peculiar position of the polymorphic section Caninae as was suggested by Henker. Within the section Caninae, a hierarchical structure was observed reflecting three morphologically well-distinguishable groups: Rubigineae, Vestitae, and Caninae. Although each group is characterised by consistent morphological characters, the genetical and morphological overlap between the groups is substantial and indicates the occurrence of interspecific hybridisation. Moreover, no arguments were found to support the subdivision of R. balsamica (subsection Tomentellae) from the subsection Caninae as was proposed by Henker. At the European scale, intraspecific geographical differentiation was observed within R. spinosissima, R. gallica, R. majalis, and R. pendulina. At the small geographical scale of Belgium, genetic differentiation was assessed within R. spinosissima. The Belgian R. arvensis populations displayed both genetic and morphological differentiation. In contrast, the observed genetic differentiation within the section Caninae tended to be related with the presence of several section Caninae taxa at a certain locality. The impact of (ancient) interspecific hybridisation events on the morphological and/or genetic variation of the section Caninae taxa is stressed. In the framework of conservation and use of autochthonous genetic resources, the observed intraspecific differentiation should be maintained if it is reflected in the genetic structure of the population and when it influences the fitness of that population or species. In the case of the section Caninae populations, conservation units need to be identified. In conclusion, provenance trails should validate the observed differentiations and conservation guidelines should be evaluate for each species or conservation unit separately.

Grantor dc:publisher

Ghent University. Faculty of Bioscience Engineering

Year dc:date

2008

Author dc:creator

• De Cock, Katrien

Contributors dc:contributor

• Van Bockstaele, Erik
• De Riek, Jan
• Van Slycken, Jos

• Biology and Life Sciences

Statement dc:rights

• info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Language dc:language

eng

Identifier

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/472039
urn:isbn:9789059892347
https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/472039/file/1881219

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:archive.ugent.be:472039