What 2,900 wild grapevines reveal about the genetic diversity of Vitis vinifera L. subsp. sylvestris
Abstract
Vitis vinifera L. subsp. sylvestris is the wild ancestor of the European cultivated grapevine (V. vinifera L. subsp. sativa). The recent identification of valuable alleles associated with abiotic stress tolerance and disease resistance in this subspecies has led to coordinated efforts towards the identification, characterization and preservation of the few remaining populations still present in river valleys, forest margins, and humid habitats throughout Europe, Western Asia, and North Africa. Previous genetic studies indicated the presence of two major sylvestris ecotypes, with genomic signatures differentiating populations of western and eastern origin. These works also indicated strong genetic differences between sylvestris and sativa populations, as well as important gene flow between them due to their prolonged coexistence.
However, an in-depth characterization of this subspecies is still needed to fully resolve its population structure, useful to inform effective conservation and management strategies.
In this cooperative work, we performed the genetic characterization of 1,460 newly sampled sylvestris individuals by a set of standard SSR markers, which were merged with those already available in the literature. Following rigorous data curation and allele size standardization based on reference cultivars and allelic frequency patterns, this approach generated the largest dataset of genetic profiles for this subspecies available to date, compiling over 2,900 unique genetic profiles from 21 countries falling within its natural habitat range. Population structure analyses divided these genetic profiles into two ancestral genetic groups, broadly corresponding to the division of this subspecies into western and eastern ecotypes, and supporting the approach adopted in this study. Finer levels of resolution revealed a more complex genetic structure, identifying up to five well-defined genetic subgroups that correspond to the geographic origins of the sampled genotypes: the Southern Caucasus, the Middle East, the Maghreb and Iberian Peninsula, Central Europe and the Balkans, and a narrowly distributed group restricted to Central European regions of Austria and Slovenia. Complementary phylogenetic and dissemination modelling analyses supported this subdivision level, and facilitated inference of the relationships and potential evolutionary pathways among the identified genetic subgroups. Overall, this study provides an updated global assessment of the genetic diversity of this endangered subspecies and delivers valuable information for its effective management and conservation.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the European Cooperative Programme for Plant Genetic Resources (ECPGR, https://www.ecpgr.org/).
Issue: GBG 2026
Type: Oral
Authors
1 Julius Kühn Institute (JKI), Institute for Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof, Siebeldingen, Germany
2 Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, Milano, Italy
3 Center for Agriculture Food and Environment (C3A), University of Trento, San Michele all’Adige, Italy
4 Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all’Adige, Italy
5 Institute for Adriatic Crops and Karst Reclamation, Split, Croatia
6 Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Croatia
7 Department of Vitis, Institute of Olive Tree, Subtropical Crops and Viticulture, Hellenic Agricultural Organization DIMITRA, Lykovrysi, Greece
8 Research Group of Plant Genomics, Institute of Molecular Biology of National Academy of Sciences RA, 0014 Yerevan, Armenia
9 Research Institute of Biology, YSU, 0025 Yerevan, Armenia
10 UMR AGAP Institut, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRAE, Institut Agro, Montpellier, F-34398, France
11 Instituto de Ciencias de la Vid y del Vino (CSIC, UR, Gobierno de La Rioja), Logroño, Spain
12 Instituto Nacional de Investigação Agrária e Veterinária, Polo de Inovação de Dois Portos, Portugal
13 Agricultural Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture Rural development and Environment, Nicosia, Cyprus
14 Institute for Sustainable Plant Protection – Research Council of Italy, Grugliasco, Italy
15 Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y Desarrollo Rural Agrario y Alimentario (IMIDRA), Madrid, Spain
16 University of Akdeniz, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture, Antalya, Türkiye
17 School of Agriculture, Food, and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne., Australia
18 University Centre of Viticulture and Enology Meranovo, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Slovenia