ArticlePDF Available

Identification and characterization of Romanian grapevine genetic resources

  • National Research and Development Institute for Biotechnology in Horticulture Stefanesti, Arges, Romania
Vitis 56, 173–180 (2017)
© The author(s).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License
Correspondence to: Dr. M. Crespan, CREA - Centro di ricerca per la viticoltura e l’enologia, Viale 28 Aprile, 26, 31015 Conegliano
(TV), Italy. Fax: +39 0438 738489. E-mail:
DOI: 10.5073/vitis.2017.56.173-180
Identication and characterization of Romanian grapevine genetic resources
C. F. PopesCu1), E. Maul2), L. C. Dejeu3), D. Dinu4), R. N. GheorGe1), V. lauCou5),
T. laCoMbe5), D. MiGliaro6) and M. Crespan6)
1) National Research and Development Institute for Biotechnology in Horticulture Ştefāneşti-Argeş, România
2) JKI - Julius Kühn-Institut, Institut für Rebenzüchtung Geilweilerhof, Siebeldingen, Germany
3) Faculty of Horticulture, University of Agronomical Science and Veterinary Medicine, Bucharest, România
4) Research and Development Station for Viticulture and Oenology Drāgāşani-Vâlcea, România
5) INRA, UMR 1334 AGAP, Equipe Diversité, Adaptation et Amélioration de la Vigne, Montpellier, France
6) Council for Agricultural Research and Economics - Centre of Viticulture and Enology Research, Conegliano (TV), Italy
The research focused on old Romanian varieties of
local distribution, with very limited growing area and
also on those nowadays neglected, to identify, charac-
terize and compare these cultivars with one another and
on a larger geographic scale. Ampelograc characteriza-
tion with 48 descriptors, photographs of shoot tip, leaf
and bunch and genotyping using 13 SSR markers were
applied together with literature references to conrm
trueness to type. The sixty one accessions belonged to fty
one varieties. New synonymies were detected (e.g. 'Ne-
gru românesc' = 'Bātutā neagrā'; 'Cârcioasā' = 'Balint
weiss'; 'Galbenā māruntā' = 'Kakotrygis'), assignments
were modied (e.g. 'Galbenā uriaşā' = 'Mirkovaca' and
'Galbenā de Odobeşti' as previously assumed), mis-
nomers identied and unique genotypes were detected
which had never been described before. Molecular data
supported previous pedigree relationships and allowed
new parent-offspring hypotheses to be formulated. The
results were shown to be useful for updating the infor-
mation on old Romanian grapevine germplasm.
K e y w o r d s : SSR; genotyping; autochthonous cultivars;
synonyms; germplasm.
There is a long history of grapevine cultivation and
wine production on Romanian territories, documented from
the 7th century BC onwards (ConstantinesCu et al. 1970). It
is today one of the most important fruit crops with a vine-
yard area of about 192,000 ha, 95 % for wine and 5 % for
table grapes (Romanian National Ofce of Vine and Wine
Products - NOVWP, 2016, The rst
research papers with scientic descriptions of grapevine
varieties were published in Romania during the 19th century
(IonesCu 1868, niColeanu 1900) and the rst ampelographic
collections were established at Pietroasa (1895), Bucharest
(1925), Valea Cālugāreascā (1925), Huşi (1925), Drāgāşani
and Miniş (1939). Other small collections were established
in six research stations and four university centres aiming
to maintain the highest number of grapevine varieties as
possible under secure conditions. Today these collections
hold around 1,381 wine and table grape accessions (17.8 %
considered as Romanian varieties and clones), 42 rootstock
varieties and 85 interspecic varieties for fruit production.
Over time, these collections have been the source of refer-
ence plant material for thorough comparative studies and
also for most research activities involving ampelographic
characterization, phenology and evaluation of yield and oe-
nological potential of grapevine varieties and clones. Proof
of these intensive studies are the seven volumes of "Ampe-
lograa Republicii Populare Romne" published between
1959 and 1970 (ConstantinesCu et al. 1959, 1960, 1961,
1962, 1965, 1966, 1970), which are still an international
reference in the eld of ampelography. Description and
evaluation of varieties considered of economic importance
for wine production were of primary interest (InDreas and
Visan 2001, Rotaru 2009). Less effort was made for old
Romanian varieties of local distribution and for those now-
adays neglected or with very limited growing areas.
In the last years, the ampelographic descriptions have
been enriched with molecular characterisations, especially
for cultivars of scientic and economic value, aiming to
accurately identify the autochthonous varieties (GheorGhe
et al. 2008, boDea et al. 2009, butiuC-Keul et al. 2010,
Coste et al. 2010), or to facilitate the registration of Ro-
manian cultivars in the European Vitis Database (Gheţea
et al. 2010 and 2012).
The aim of this study was to obtain a molecular and
ampelographic characterization of 61 accessions, most of
them presumed autochthonous Romanian varieties, selected
on the basis of the following criteria: a) varieties grown since
ancient times according to old documents and turned into
international cultivars due to their biological competence; b)
major local cultivars, of local importance, extensively grown
in Romania; c) minor cultivars, of local importance, grown
especially in private vineyards; d) neglected local cultivars,
at risk of extinction and retained in germplasm collections.
They encompassed mainly varieties recommended for wine
174 C. F. popesCu et al.
production and some table and wine/table cultivars. The re-
search was developed within the framework of COST Action
FA1003 "East-West collaboration for grapevine diversity
exploration and mobilization of adaptive traits for breeding"
(Failla 2015), with the aim of identifying, characterizing
and comparing the selected Romanian varieties with one
another and on a larger geographic scale. Knowledge of
grapevine varieties provenance is useful to better understand
their movement through different countries over time, even
when the memory of those transfers had been lost, together
with the original name of the variety. As a consequence,
the information available on specic varieties may become
broader and can be retained or rejected, when aware of the
true identity of the cultivars under study.
Genotyping was applied to identify possible synonyms,
homonyms, misnomers and unique genotypes, using a set
of 13 SSR markers encompassing the nine SSR markers
recommended for common use by the European project
GrapeGen06 (Maul et al. 2012). The SSR proles also
allowed comparison of the Romanian grapevine germplasm
with literature data and molecular databases, searching for
synonyms with respect to neighbouring countries. Prelim-
inary indications obtained from molecular data were then
compared with available morphological information.
Material and Methods
P l a n t m a t e r i a l : Sixty-one accessions (Tab. 1)
were characterized, belonging to three germplasm collec-
tions: Faculty of Horticulture - University of Agronomical
Science and Veterinary Medicine, Bucharest (UASVM);
Research and Development Station for Viticulture and
Oenology Drāgāşani-Vâlcea (RDSVO); National Research
and Development Institute for Biotechnology in Horticulture
Ştefāneşti-Argeş (NRDIBH).
Ampelographic description: The ampelo-
graphic description was carried out for two or three consec-
utive years, in accordance with the 2nd edition of the "OIV
Descriptor list for grapevine varieties and Vitis species" (OIV
2009) with 48 descriptors and following the standardized
methodology reported in Rustioni et al. (2014). The mor-
phological characteristics recorded in the three germplasm
collections referred to the following aspects: 7 for young
shoot (OIV 001, 003, 004, 006, 007, 008 and 016), 17 for
young and mature leaf (OIV 051, 053, 067, 068, 070, 072,
074, 075, 076, 079, 080, 081-1, 081-2, 083-2, 084, 087 and
094), 15 for type of ower, bunch and berry aspects (OIV
151, 155, 202, 204, 206, 208, 209, 220, 221, 223, 225, 231,
235, 236 and 241) and 9 for phenology, growth, quality and
quantity of grape yield (OIV 301, 303, 351, 502, 503, 504,
505, 506 and 508).
Genotyping and identification: Genomic
DNA was isolated from 100 mg of young leaf using Qia-
gen DNeasy Plant mini-kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany),
following the manufacturer's protocol. DNA concentration
and quality were checked by spectrophotometric analysis
and electrophoresis in 1 % agarose gel. Thirteen SSR
markers were used for genotyping: the nine proposed as
common grape markers for international use within the
framework of the Grapegen06 European project (VVS2,
VVMD32, VrZAG62, VrZAG79) (Maul et al. 2012), plus
ISV2 (VMC6e1), ISV3 (VMC6f1), ISV4 (VMC6g1) and
VMCNG4b9 (MiGliaro et al. 2013). The SSR analyses
were performed following the protocol detailed in MiGliaro
et al. (2013), using uorescent primers and an ABI3130xl
genetic analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA),
with some minor modications for 11 SSR markers. The
remaining two (VVMD25 and VVMD32) were analyzed
separately, as single markers. SSR allele calling was per-
formed using ABI Prism GeneMapper software version 3.0,
Table 1
Accession list, general information and SSR matches
Accession no. DNA no. Accession name
Type of
Berry skin
Year of
by Con-
et al.
status of
in col-
Matches by SSR
VIVC prime
ROM045-003 180.12.R Alb românesc (misnomer) H green W1961 360 2, 3 Sarba 10738 Sarba
ROM051-237 178.12.R Ardeleancā H green W1959 360 2, 3 Bakator belyi 904 Bakator belyi
ROM06-0011 163.12.R Bacator FFr rose W1959 360 1, 3 Bakator roz 905 Bakator roz
ROM051-238 161.12.R Bābeascā neagrā H blue black W1959 320 1, 2, 3 Babeasca neagra 843 Babeasca negra
ROM051-239 203.12.R Bāșicatā H green W1961 360 2, 3 Basicata 1022 BASICATA
ROM045-025 206.12.R Bātutā neagrā Hblue black W/T 1959 360 2 Batuta neagra 1042 Batuta neagra
ROM045-172 208.12.R Negru românesc black W1966 360 2, 3
ROM051-240 212.12.R Berbecel H green W1959 360 2, 3 Berbecel 1148 Berbecel
ROM045-037 181.12.R Braghinā albā* FFr green W- 360 2, 3 1645 Braghina alba
ROM045-036 182.12.R Braghinā roz FFr rose W1959 360 2 Braghina rosie 1644 Braghina rosie
ROM06-0024 157.12.R Busuioacā de Bohotin H red W1960 320 1, 3
Muscat à petits
grains blancs
(somatic variant)
8248 Muscat à petits
ROM06-0026 160.12.R Cadarcā H black W1959 320 1, 3 Kadarka kek 5898 Kadarka kek
ROM045-048 184.12.R Cârcioasā FFr green W1965 360 2, 3 Balint weiss 935 Balint weiss
Identication and characterization of Romanian grapevine genetic resources 175
Tab. 1, continued
ROM051-241 185.12.R Crâmpoşie FFe green W/T 1959 330 2, 3 Crimposie 3237 Crimposie
ROM045-051 201.12.R Ceauş alb FFr green T 1959 360 2, 3 Chaouch blanc 10196 Chaouch blanc
ROM051-242 202.12.R Ceauş roz FFe rose T 1959 360 2, 3 Chaouch rozovyi 2507 Chaouch rozovyi
ROM051-243 183.12.R Cioinic FFe green W/T 1961 360 2, 3 Cioinic 2674 Cionic
ROM051-246 177.12.R Coarnā albā FFr green W/T 1959 360 1, 3 Coarna alba 2724 Coarna alba
ROM051-248 204.12.R Coarnā roșie FFr red T 1961 360 2, 3 Coarna rosie 2728 Coarna rosie
ROM051-247 176.12.R Coarnā neagrā FFr black-red T 1959 320 1, 2, 3 Coarna neagra 2726 Coarna neagra
ROM051-244 213.12.R Coada oilor/Ovis H green W1962 360 2, 3 Juhfark 5852 Juhfark
ROM06-0046 169.12.R Creațā H green W/T 1959 360 1, 3 Kreaca 6501 Kreaca
ROM051-249 200.12.R Creațā de Banat 1959 360 2, 3
ROM051-250 187.12.R Cruciuliţā H green W1961 360 2, 3 Cruciulita 3267 Cruciulita
ROM051-251 162.12.R Feteascā albā H green W1959 310 1, 2, 3 Feteasca alba 4119 Feteasca alba
ROM051-252 158.12.R Feteascā neagrā H black W1959 310 1, 2, 3 Feteasca neagra 4120 Feteasca neagra
ROM051-253 165.12.R Feteascā regalā H green W1959 310 1, 2, 3 Feteasca regala 4121 Feteasca regala
ROM051-25458 172.12.R Frâncușā H green W1959 320 1, 2, 3 Francuse 4221 Francuse
175.12.R Galbenā de Odobești
H green W
1959 320 1, 2, 3
Galbena de
Odobesti 12727 Galbena de
758.16 Galbenā de Odobești
756.16 Galbenā de Odobești
174.12.R Zghiharā de Huși
1960 320 1, 2, 3759.16 Zghiharā de Huși
ROM051-274 757.16 Zghiharā de Huși
ROM045-100 186.12.R Galbenā māruntā H green W- 360 2 Kakotrygis 5920 Kakotrygis
ROM051-256 188.12.R Galbenā uriaşā H green W1961 360 2, 3 Galbena uriasa 4322 Galbena uriasa
ROM045-106 189.12.R Gordan
1961 360 2, 3
Iordan 5544 IordanROM06-0069 168.12.R Iordanā green 1960 320 1, 3
ROM045-253 198.12.R Zemoasā green 1962 360 2, 3
ROM051-258 190.12.R Gordin H green W1959 360 2, 3 Gordin 4901 Gordin
ROM06-0065 166.12.R Grasā de Cotnari H green W1959 310 1, 3 Grasa de Cotnari 4948 Grasa de Cotnari
191.12.R Lampāu (misnomer) H green W- 360 2 Tompa Mihaly 12564 Tompa Mihali
ROM051-259 170.12.R Majarcā albā H green-rose W1960 360 1, 3 Slankamenka
bela 11866 Slankamenka
ROM045-146 207.12.R Moroştinā* H green W- 360 2, 3 Morostina 8007 Morostina
ROM051-260 167.12.R Mustoasā de Māderat
(misnomer) H green W1960 360 2, 3 42198
Mustoasa de
(not identied)
ROM051-261 192.12.R Negru mare
(questionable)* FFe black W/T 1962 360 2, 3 42199 Negru mare
ROM051-262 193.12.R Negru moale H black W1960 360 2, 3 Negru moale 8464 Negru moale
ROM051-263 194.12.R Negru vârtos H black W1960 360 2, 3 Mavrud
Varnenskii 7540 Mavrud
159.12.R Negru vârtos
(questionable) H black W- 360 1 42197 Negru vartos
ROM045-179 195.12.R Om rāu* H green W1962 360 2, 3 8765 Om rau
ROM051-265 215.12.R Pârciu H green W1962 360 2, 3 Pirciu 9300 Pirciu
ROM06-0103 173.12.R Plāvaie Hgreen W1960 330 1, 3 Plavay 9553 Plavay
179.12.R Alb rotund green W- 360 2
ROM045-206 196.12.R Românie* H green W- 360 2, 3 Romanie§ 10177 Romanie
ROM06-0134 164.12.R Tāmâioasā româneascā H green W1960 310 1, 2, 3 Tamaiosa
rominesca (faux) 25546 Tamaioasa
ROM045-234 214.12.R Tâţa caprei albā H green T 1962 360 2 Tsitsa kaprei 16449 Tsitsa kaprei
ROM051-268 210.12.R Tâţa caprei neagrā H black T - 360 2, 3 Hora 5423 Hora
ROM051-269 211.12.R Tâţa vacii albā FFe green T 1962 360 2, 3 Halholyag 6419 Halholyag
ROM045-237 209.12.R Tâţa vacii neagrā* H black T - 360 2 Kozi Cici
cherveni 25547 Kozi Cici
ROM045-238 199.12.R Teişor (misnomer) H green W1959 360 2, 3 Ezerjo 4027 Ezerjo
ROM051-272 197.12.R Vulpea H black W/T 1962 360 2, 3 Vulpea 13186 Vulpea
(1) H = hermaphrodite; FFr = female functionally with reexed stamens; FFe = female funcionally with erect stamens.
(2) W = wine, T = table.
(3) 310 = local cultivar, spread all over, international cultivar; 320 = major local cultivar, of local importance, but extensively
grown; 330 = minor local cultivar, of local importance, fairly utilized; 360 = local neglected cultivar, at risk of extinction.
(4) 1 = UASVM, 2 = RDSVO, 3 = NRDIBH; *genotype not present in Vassal.
§ in agreement with Zulj et al. 2013.
176 C. F. popesCu et al.
with a home-made bin set produced with reference varieties.
Preliminary indications about cultivar identity were obtained
by comparison of the genetic proles with literature data,
VIVC (Vitis International Variety Catalogue, http://www., CREA-Viticulture and Enology molecular data-
base, partially published in the Italian Grapevine Catalogue, and in the Italian Vitis
Database,, and with the INRA molec-
ular database of the Vassal collection (LauCou et al. 2011).
S t a t i s t i c s : Cervus software (KalinowsKi et al.
2007) version 3.0 (
was used for preliminary indications on possible par-
ents-progeny trios and rst degree relationships.
Results and Discussion
The 61 accessions analysed in the study belonged to
51 different genotypes. This was conrmed by both micro-
satellite markers and ampelography. Precise morphological
descriptions of the Romanian grape germplasm, literature
references, ancient records in grapevine collections and
the availability of SSR-marker databases were of great
Ampelographic description: All recorded
data were compared with the detailed ampelographic de-
scriptions from old documents to obtain a preliminary con-
rmation of the authenticity of the studied accessions, with
the exception of nine varieties: 'Galbenā māruntā', 'Lampāu',
'Moroştinā', 'Negru vârtos' (questionable), 'Alb rotund', 'Ţâţa
caprei neagrā' and 'Ţâţa vacii neagrā', for which no informa-
tion was found, and 'Braghinā albā' and 'Românie', having
only partial information (brezeanu 1912, Gorjan and botu
2013). The ampelographic descriptions, available in the
European Vitis database (, revealed
great differences among the studied varieties, except for
a few traits, such as number of consecutive tendrils (OIV
016), specic for V. vinifera, intensity of esh anthocyanin
coloration in the berry (OIV 231) and formation of seeds
(OIV 241). The morphological and agronomic characters of
the studied accessions mostly conrmed previous ampelo-
graphic documents. Few differences, at only one level of the
notes corresponding to a certain characteristic were found,
such as intensity of anthocyanin coloration on prostrate
hairs of the shoot tip (OIV 003), density of prostrate hairs
on the shoot tip (OIV 004), colour of upper side of blade
(4th leaf) (OIV 051), shape of blade of the mature leaf (OIV
067), degree of opening/overlapping of petiole sinus (OIV
079), shape of base of petiole sinus (OIV 080), density of
prostrate hairs between main veins on lower side of blade
(OIV 084), bunch density (OIV 204), bunch shape (OIV
208), berry shape (OIV 223), sugar content of must (OIV
505) and total acidity of must (OIV 506). These differenc-
es could be ascribed to the range of expected variability
of morphological and agronomic characteristics linked to
environment, cultural conditions, health status of vines, and
might also depend on interpretation by ampelographers.
Table and table/wine accessions, in comparison with
varieties commonly used for wine production, were char-
acterized by larger and heavier bunches, bigger berries and
juice with lower acidity and sugar content.
Among the 51 genotypes found in this study, thirteen
were characterized by functionally female owers. The
percentage (25.5 %) observed in this study was a relatively
high proportion taking into account the average number
observed world-wide (i.e. about 8 %, Boursiquot et al.
1995) and highlighted the originality of the Romanian gene
pool. This trait is considered as ancestral and related to
Vitis vinifera domestication, however it could be inherited
through segregation by sexual reproduction, given that
cultivated grapevines frequently carry a female allele (Hf),
while homozygous hermaphroditic vines (HH) are rare
(FeChter et al. 2012). In addition, this peculiar character
in grapevine has aroused the interest of breeders, because
it simplies cross hybridizations in breeding programmes
(Chaϊb et al. 2010). Morphologically, only eight of them
produce owers with well-formed ovaries, stigma, style and
anthers with shorter laments, reexed outwards from the
ovary: 'Bacator', 'Braghinā roz', 'Braghinā albā', 'Cârcioasā',
'Ceauş alb', 'Coarnā albā', 'Coarnā roşie', 'Coarnā neagrā'.
The other ve develop hermaphrodite owers with anthers
inclined outwards: 'Crâmpoşie', 'Ceauş roz', 'Cioinic', 'Ne-
gru mare' and 'Ţâţa vacii albā' (Tab. 1). These owers, with
stamens sloping outwards from the ovary, are considered
apparently normal, but functionally female (ConstantinesCu
1958). All these varieties have common characteristics: a)
the ratio between length of stamens and length of pistil is
≤ 1; b) the pollen is sterile, abundant and sometimes with
acorn shape ('Braghinā roz', 'Ceauş roz', 'Ceauş alb', 'Coarnā
albā'); c) given pollen sterility, yield is variable, depending
on weather conditions during anthesis; moreover, they re-
quire male or hermaphroditic vines nearby, having the same
owering period to enable pollination. The inconstancy of
grape yield was the main reason for the declining interest in
these varieties. Nowadays only 'Coarnā neagrā' is grown on
large areas (over 100 ha) being remarkable for the special
appearance and taste of grapes, and also 'Crâmpoşie' for its
very good qualities as both table and wine grapes.
Many of these autochthonous varieties, expressing
high sugar content and equilibrate acidity of the must, have
aroused breeders' interest. Elite clones with special quali-
ties were selected and approved for wine production, like
in 'Crâmpoşie', 'Tāmâioasā româneascā', 'Feteascā albā',
'Feteascā neagrā', 'Fetească regală', 'Braghină roz', 'Bragh-
ină albă', 'Gordan', 'Berbecel', 'Băşicată', 'Negru moale' and
'Negru vârtos', or for table grapes with pleasant appearance
and avour, like in 'Coarnă albă', 'Coarnă neagră', 'Coarnă
roşie' and 'Ţâţa caprei albă'.
Genotyping and identification: Fifty-one
distinct SSR proles were found (see Table, suppl. data).
Interestingly, 'Iordanā' accession showed a slightly differ-
ent SSR prole from the other two synonyms 'Gordan' and
'Zemoasā' at VVS2 locus, being heterozygous (133-143),
instead of homozygous (133-133); 'Plāvaie' was triallelic at
VVMD32 locus (253, 265 and 273). A preliminary indication
on genotype identity was rst obtained by comparison of
each SSR prole with literature data, VIVC molecular data-
base, CREA-Viticulture and Enology and INRA molecular
Identication and characterization of Romanian grapevine genetic resources 177
databases. On the basis of genotyping results, ampelographic
comparisons were made with available descriptions and
historical documents for appropriate cultivar identication.
Most accessions were identied by conrming already
known information. In the following we only comment on
the new identications obtained.
Updating of previously uncorrect
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s : 'Busuioacā de Bohotin' is a major
local cultivar, grown on 216 ha. Different opinions exist
about its origin: a) it is the result of empirical selection
from wild grapevines present along the Prut River; b) it
was brought from ancient Greece together with 'Tāmâio-
asā româneascā'; c) its Romanian origin is proved by the
connected name the village of Bohotin. While the SSR
prole of 'Busuioacā de Bohotin' matched that of 'Muscat à
petits grains blancs', the red berry colour and ampelograph-
ic description showed it as being very similar to 'Muscat à
petits grains rouges' (VIVC 8248). For these reasons we
concluded that 'Busuioacā de Bohotin' is the red somatic
variant for berry colour of 'Muscat à petits grains blancs'
and that it does not correspond to 'Muscat rouge de Ma-
dere', as previously stated by ConstantinesCu et al. (1960).
The same authors and the "International List of Vine Varie-
ties and their Synonyms" (OIV 2013) considered 'Tāmâio-
asā româneascā', one of the most important and appre-
ciated grapevine varieties in Romania, to be identical to
'Muscat à petits grains blancs'. However, in this study it
turned out that the analyzed accession (ROM06-0134) did
not share the SSR prole of 'Muscat à petits grains blancs',
but matched the 'Tamaiosa rominesca' accession FRA139-
0Mtp1091, grown in Vassal and introduced from the Bu-
charest collection in 1961. After genotyping and owing to
the information given by ConstantinesCu et al. (1960), the
French accession was considered a misnomer and renamed
as 'Tamaiosa rominesca faux #3426' (faux means wrong in
French). Ampelographic distinction of this genotype and
'Muscat à petits grains blancs' is evident, despite their close
genetic relationship because present molecular data and
laCoMbe et al. (2013) showed that this genotype is most
likely a 'Muscat à petits grains blancs' offspring (Tab. 2).
Two further 'Tāmâiosā' accessions entered Vassal, one
from Bulgaria (1950) and another from Romania (1954)
and were identied as 'Muscat à petits grains blancs'. In
addition, 'Tāmâioasā româneascā' from Craiova Univer-
sity grapevine collection, genotyped by Žulj Mihalević
et al. (2013), matched the 'Muscat à petits grains blancs'
genetic prole, leading to the assumption that 'Tāmâioasā
româneascā' perfectly described by ConstantinesCu et al.
in 1960 is really 'Muscat à petits grains blancs'. Moreover
a handwritten record by the ampelographer Paul Truel of
Vassal (Figure) tells that when the 'Tamaiosa rominesca'
accession entered the collection three plants were 'Muscat
à petits grains blancs' with strong muscat avour and two
were different with slight muscat avour and of unknown
identity, pointing to a mixture of the two varieties. The lat-
ter being kept under the accession ID FRA139-0Mtp1091.
As a result of these ndings a new name for 'Tamaiosa
rominesca faux #3426' was proposed: 'Tamaioasa Bucureş-
ti'. For the future a suggestion is to study the mix of varie-
ties in old 'Muscat à petits grains blancs' vineyards all over
Table 2
Possible rst degree relationships inside Romanian varieties and
with 'Heunisch weiss' comparing 13 SSRs without mismatching
loci, computed with Cervus software and ordered by descending
pair LOD scores
Putative rst degree related varieties Pair LOD
Results of
with Vassal
Coarna neagra Hora 1,14E+15 yes
Coarna rosie Tsitsa kaprei 9,90E+14 yes
Muscat à petits
grains blancs
bucuresti 9,47E+14 yes
Balint weiss Galbena uriasa 7,61E+14 yes
Iordan Crimposie 7,36E+14 yes
Coarna alba Kreaca 7,36E+14 yes
Gordin Braghina rosie 7,24E+14
by additional
Chaouch blanc Chaouch rozovyi 7,14E+14 yes
Iordan Heunisch weiss 7,11E+14 yes
Iordan Plavay 6,99E+14 yes
Coarna alba Gordin 6,84E+14 yes
Berbecel Pirciu 6,64E+14 possible
Negru moale Heunisch weiss 6,51E+14 yes
Bakator belyi Bakator roz 6,31E+14 yes
Braghina alba Braghina rosie 5,77E+14
Morostina Heunisch weiss 5,56E+14 yes
Balint weiss Slankamenka
bela 5,35E+14 yes
Juhfark Romanie 5,18E+14
Bakator belyi Negru moale 4,93E+14
by additional
Francuse Basicata 3,85E+14
by additional
Francuse Heunisch weiss 3,07E+14 yes
Grasa de Cotnari Heunisch weiss 2,88E+14 yes
the country to clarify the situation and thus be of benet for
Romanian viticulture.
'Galbenā uriaşā' was considered an autochthonous vari-
ety and clonal variant of 'Galbenā de Odobeşti' (NiColeanu
1900). It has been grown here and there in Moldavia and
Transilvania regions and today is maintained in two grape-
vine collections. 'Galbenā uriaşā' SSR prole matched that
of 'Mirkovaca', an endangered Croatian variety described by
Maletić et al. (1999 and 2015), but was different from that
of 'Galbenā de Odobeşti', therefore being another variety. A
rst degree relationship between them can also be excluded.
The 'Om rāu' accession analysed here is certainly the one
described by ConstantinesCu et al. (1962) and is different
from the one genotyped by Žulj Mihalević et al. (2013).
Varieties absent in the Romanian am-
pelographic literature: 'Galbenā māruntā' is one
of the varieties in danger of extinction and is today main-
178 C. F. popesCu et al.
tained in only two grapevine collections. No documents were
available about its origin or descriptions for comparison. Its
SSR prole matched that of 'Kakotrygis', a Greek variety.
Preliminary ampelographic observations and comparisons
performed on the mature leaf and bunch showed that 'Gal-
benā māruntā' is very similar to the 'Kakotrygis' described
by Kotinis (1984). 'Moroştinā' is another very rare variety
in Romanian vineyards, and no reference documents were
available for description. 'Ţâţa caprei neagrā' SSR prole
matched that of a better known Bulgarian variety named
'Hora' and 'Tâţa vacii neagră' matched that of 'Kozi Cici
cherveni', a variety grown at the Bulgarian Institut de Vit-
iculture et d'Oenologie in Pleven. Regarding 'Braghinā',
ConstantinesCu et al. (1959) mentioned the long standing
presence of this variety with rose grapes in Romania, where
there were many populations with high variability, for ex-
ample showing leaves with entire or with more lobes, with
star-shaped owers, and also populations with different
berry colour and size. The two accessions 'Braghinā albā'
and 'Braghinā roz' showed two different molecular proles
so are therefore different varieties; interestingly, they could
be rst degree related (Tab. 2). 'Braghinā albā' analyzed by
Žulj Mihalević et al. (2013) is a distinct variety.
N e w s y n o n y m s : 'Bātutā neagrā' and 'Negru
românesc' were considered different varieties and were thus
described separately by ConstantinesCu et al. in 1959 and
1966, respectively. The analyzed accessions shared the same
molecular prole. The ampelographic descriptions of the
two cultivars from the old documents, in comparison with
those performed in our collections, conrmed the molecular
results and supported their synonymy.
'Cârcioasā' was described by ConstantinesCu et al.
(1965) as an old autochthonous variety, rarely grown and
without any synonym. However, our results showed that
'Cârcioasā' shared the same genotype with 'Balint weiss',
therefore being an additional, new synonym. 'Coada oilor'
was described as 'Ovis' by ConstantinesCu et al. (1962).
Considered as autochthonous and grown since long before
the phylloxera invasion, the cultivar is today maintained
only in collections. Its SSR prole matched that of 'Juhfark'
(GalbaCs et al. 2009, jahnKe et al. 2009). Comparison of
ampelographic features of 'Juhfark' and 'Ovis' as given in the
literature (neMeth 1970, ConstantinesCu et al. 1962) and
'Juhfark' and 'Ovis' accessions described by Geilweilerhof
and Ştefāneşti respectively likewise attested to their identity.
'Gordan', 'Iordanā' and 'Zemoasā' accessions showed
identical microsatellite proles, proving to be synonyms.
All these varieties are considered autochthonous and have
been grown since before the phylloxera invasion. Constan-
tinesCu et al. in 1960 and 1961 mentioned the synonymy
between 'Gordan' and 'Iordan' (in Romanian literature
present as 'Iordanā'), their names having a common origin
from Iordan, becoming Giordan and after that Gordan. Our
results are in accordance with ndings in the French Vassal
collection (
and in the European Vitis Database (
de). Today, 'Iordanā' is a major cultivated variety grown
mostly in western and central Romania, 'Gordan' is grown
in a small area especially in the southeastern wine region
and 'Zemoasā' is only rarely present in private vineyards or
in repositories. The SSR proles of 'Gordin' and 'Gordan'
proved to be different, excluding the possibility of being
synonyms, unlike the Žulj Mihalević et al. (2013) ndings
and supporting the old descriptions (ConstantinesCu et al.
1959 and 1961).
Interesting results were obtained with two major cul-
tivars of local importance, extensively grown in Romania,
'Zghiharā de Huşi' and 'Galbenā de Odobeşti', nowadays
considered to be different varieties. ConstantinesCu (1958)
wrote that "'Galbenā de Odobeşti' is one of the old Romanian
varieties with a large growing area in vineyards of Odobeşti
and Panciu; it resembles 'Bātutā neagrā', but has a different
grape colour and is a synonym of 'Zghiharā de Huşi'". Even
though ConstantinesCu et al. described 'Galbenā de Odo-
beşti' and 'Zghiharā de Huşi' separately in 1959 and 1960
respectively, our SSR data conrmed this synonymy, but
exclude a parent-offspring relationship between 'Galbenā
de Odobeşti' and 'Bātutā neagrā'.
Questionable genotypes: Some accessions,
being true-to-type on the basis of ampelographic descrip-
tors, turned out to be critical after comparison of their SSR
proles with literature data. 'Negru mare' was classied as
questionable, because it differs from the one grown in Vassal.
Further observations are necessary to check the authenticity
of this variety with respect to the available ampelographic
description. 'Negru vrtos' (at present 'Negru vârtos') has
been grown in Romania since long before the phylloxera
invasion. ConstantinesCu (1958) mentioned two biotypes
of 'Negru vrtos', one with functionally female owers
and another with hermaphrodite owers, the latter being
morphologically very similar to 'Mavrud Varnenski'. The
genetic prole of our 'Negru vârtos' accession (ROM051-
263) matched that of 'Mavrud Varnenski', conrming the old
information. Two years later ConstantinesCu et al. (1960)
wrote that there are many 'Negru vrtos' biotypes. So we
Figure: Handwritten record by paul truel (1924-2014), former
ampelographer at the INRA Vassal collection, concerning the ac-
cession 'Tamaiosa romanesca #0Mtp1091', which means: "In plot
4.27S12, plants 1 and 2 are different from plants 3 to 5. Plants 3 to
5 are 'Muscat de Frontignan' [i.e. 'Muscat à petits grains blancs'].
Plants 1 and 2 are much more vigorous, without muscat avour
on 4 August 1981 (véraison stage) whereas 'Muscat de Frontignan'
has muscat avour”.
Identication and characterization of Romanian grapevine genetic resources 179
hypothesized that 'Negru vârtos' could represent a larger
group of homonyms, encompassing 'Mavrud varnenski',
the female genotype grown in Vassal (turned out to be true-
to-type) and this third variety (159.12.R) genotyped in the
present research.
M i s n o m e r s : 'Alb românesc' (ROM045-003) was
shown to be a misnomer as the SSR prole and ampelo-
graphic traits both match 'Sarba', a new bred Romanian
cultivar. 'Teişor' (ROM045-238) was regarded as a misnomer
expected to be a synonym of 'Harslevelu' (ConstantinesCu et
al. 1959), and not 'Ezerjo'. In fact, 'Teişor' is the diminutive
of 'Tei', meaning lime, and many synonyms of 'Harslevelu'
have names referring to the shape of its leaf, similar to that
of the lime tree, like 'Lindenblättriger', 'Feuille de Tilleul',
'Frunzā de Tei'. 'Mustoasā de Māderat' did not match the
true-to-type grown in Vassal; our genotype is original and
no matches were found with other already genotyped va-
rieties. So it remained anonymous. 'Lampāu' was another
misnomer matching 'Tompa Mihaly' SSR prole and the
ampelographic description of this accession also did not
correspond to literature data.
Possible trios for parents and off-
springs and first degree relationships:
Possible parents-offspring trios and rst degree relationships
were found. Cervus software indicated two possible trios
without mismatchings for candidate parents and progeny.
The rst one was that 'Feteasca regala' could be the prog-
eny of 'Feteasca alba' and 'Francuse', with a LOD score of
1.49 E+15, supporting with 6 additional SSRs what laCoMbe
et al. (2013) already found using 20 SSRs. This information
was partially different from the genitors supposed by Con-
stantinesCu et al. (1959), i.e. 'Feteasca alba' and 'Grasa de
Cotnari', this latter variety being excluded with certainty by
molecular data. The second trio indicated 'Braghina alba' as
the progeny of 'Coarna alba' x 'Galbena de Odobesti', 'Coarna
alba' being the putative mother given the functionally female
sex of owers and 'Galbena de Odobesti' the possible father
with hermaphrodite owers. In this case the LOD score was
a little bit higher: 1.71 E+15. Cervus software indicated a
list of possible rst degree relationships (PO), reported in
Tab. 2. Some of them were partial parentages of already
completed trios, such as 'Coarna rosie' and 'Tsitsa kaprei',
full parentage being 'Coarna rosie' = 'Tsitsa kaprei' and 'Par-
mak crven'; 'Crimposie' and 'Iordan', full parentage being
'Crimposie' = 'Iordan' and 'Beala Debela'; 'Balint weiss' and
'Slankamenka bela', full parentage being 'Slankamenka bela'
= 'Balint weiss' and 'Razachie rosie' (LaCoMbe et al. 2013).
The other PO relationships were evaluated by comparison
with the larger INRA database, apart from two, because
the varieties involved, 'Braghina alba' and 'Romanie', were
not present in Vassal. The preliminary PO indications were
mostly conrmed, but three cases discarded by addition-
al markers. Five cultivars, namely 'Francuse', 'Grasa de
Cotnari', 'Iordan', 'Morostina' and 'Negru moale' showed a
PO relationship with 'Heunisch weiss'/'Gouais blanc'. So,
'Heunisch weiss'/'Gouais blanc', one of the most prolic
founders of the present grapevine assortment (Maul et al.
2015) seems also to have played an important role in the
birth of some Romanian cultivars.
Both morphological descriptors and SSR markers
proved to be efcient at conrming or detecting synonyms,
homonyms, questionables, misnomers and unique genotypes
in Romanian grapevine germplasm collections, therefore
helping to update the information about the grapevine ger-
mplasm preserved there. Together, these two methods also
claried some previous suppositions about the origin of
local/autochthonous varieties and brought out new aspects
to be analyzed.
Ampelographic methods used to characterize varieties
through standardized description, based on phenotypic
traits, were applied to obtain an up-to-date description of
the studied accessions. These ampelographic descriptions
together with genetic proles and photos are available via
the European Vitis Database. They represent a reference for
the authenticity of the studied accessions and their respective
varieties. A wide range of variability was determined among
the studied cultivars regarding certain morphological and
agronomic characters, which are especially valuable for
the autochthonous grape varieties in danger of extinction.
The molecular data complemented conventional de-
scriptions, succeeding in identifying almost all the analyzed
accessions, improving the knowledge on Romanian grape-
vine varieties. The accurate identication obtained allowed
the provenance of some varieties previously considered as
autochthonous to be known and, viceversa, to detect autoch-
thonous varieties previously considered as imported. The
pedigrees of some of them were conrmed and additional
information was produced about possible PO relationships,
delegated to future research.
raluCa niColeta GheorGhe received a grant within the
framework of the COST project- Action FA1003 "East-West Col-
laboration for Grapevine Diversity Exploration and Mobilization
of Adaptive Traits for Breeding" for a short-term scientic mission
(STSM). The research was supported by the Service for grapevine
identication of CREA-Viticulture and Enology (SIV).
BoDea, M.; PaMFil, D.; Pop, R.; Pop, I. F.; 2009: Use of random amplied
polymorphic DNA to study genetic diversity anong Romanian local
vine (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivars. Bul. USAMV-CN, seria Horticulture
66, 17-22.
boursiquot, J. M.; Dessup, M.; rennes, C.; 1995: Distribution des princi-
paux caractères phénologiques, agronomiques et technologiques chez
Vitis vinifera L. Vitis 34, 31-35.
brezeanu, V. S.; 1912: Tratat de Viticultura, Ed. Universala Bucuresti,
ButiuC-Keul, A. L.; CraCiunas, C.; Coste A.; FaGaro, M.; 2010: Discrim-
ination and genetic polymorphism in several cultivars of grapevine.
Rom. Biotech. Lett. 15,102-110.
Chaϊb, j.; torreGrosa, l.; MaCkenzie, D.; Corena, P.; bouquet, a.; thoMas
M. r.; 2010: The grape microvine – a model system for rapid forward
and reverse genetics of grapevines. Plant J. 62, 1083-1092.
180 C. F. popesCu et al.
ConstantinesCu G.; 1958: Ampelograa. Ed. Agro-Silvica de stat Bucur-
esti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGreanu, E.; lăzăresCu, V.; poenaru, I.; alexei, O.;
boureanu, C.; 1959: Ampelograa Republicii Populare Romne, Vol.
II, Ed. Academiei R.P.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGreanu, E.; lăzăresCu, V.; poenaru, I.; alexei,
O.; boureanu, C.; 1960: Ampelograa R.P.R., Vol III, Ed. Academiei
R.P.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGreanu, E.; lăzăresCu, V.; poenaru, I.; alexei,
O.; MihalCa, G.; 1961: Ampelograa Republicii Populare Romne,
Vol. IV, Ed. Academiei R.P.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGreanu, E.; lăzăresCu, V.; poenaru, I.; alexei, O.;
MihalCa, G.; boureanu, C.; 1962: Ampelograa Republicii Populare
Romne, Vol. V, Ed. Academiei R.P.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGreanu, E.; lăzăresCu, V.; poenaru, I.; alexei, o.;
boureanu, C.; 1965: Ampelograa Republicii Populare Romne, Vol.
VI, Ed. Academiei R.P.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; neGr eanu, E.; lăzăresC u, V.; poenaru , I.; 1966
Ampelograa Republicii Socialiste Romania, Vol VII, Ed. Academiei
R.S.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
ConstantinesCu, G.; alexei, o.; anGhel,G. h.; bulenCea, a. t.; boureanu,
C.; Chirilei, h.; CioCîirlan, v.; CosMin, s.; Dobre, F.; Dorobanţu,
n.; DvorniC , v.; Geor GesCu, M.; lăz ăresC u, v.; lePăDatu, v.;
MihalCa, G.; Morlova, i.; neGreanu, a. M.; neGreanu, e.; oprea,
C.; oşlobeanu, M.; Poenaru, i.; PoMohaCi, n.; teoDoresCu, i. C.;
ursu, t.; 1970: Ampelograa Republicii Socialiste Romania, Vol. I,
Ed. Academiei R.S.R. Bucuresti, Romania.
Coste, A.; PostolaChe, D.; PopesCu, F.; ButiuC-Keul, A. L.; 2010: Au-
thentication of valuable grapevine varieties from Romania through
molecular markers. Roman. Biotech. Lett. 15, 3-11.
Failla, O; 2015: East-West collaboration for grapevine diversity explo-
ration and mobilization of adaptive traits for breeding; a four years
story. Vitis 54 (Special Issue), 1-4.
FeChter, i.; hausMann, l.; DauM, M.; sörensen, t. r.; viehöver, p.; weis-
shaar, b.; töpFer, r.; 2012. Candidate genes within a 143 kb region
of the ower sex locus in Vitis. Mol. Genet. Genom. 287, 247-259.
GalbaCs, z.; Molnar, s.; halasz, G.; KozMa, p.; hoFFMann, s.; KovaCs,
l.; veres, a.; Galli, z.; szoeKe, a.; heszKy, l.; Kiss, E.; 2009:
Identication of grapevine cultivars using microsatellite-based DNA
barcodes. Vitis 48, 17-24.
GheorGhe, R. N.; PopesCu, C. F.; PaMFil, D.; PauChneCht, A. E.; 2008: Ge-
netic diversity evaluation of some autochthonous grapevine varieties
by RAPD markers. Lucr. Stiint. Seria Hortic. 51, 73-76.
Gheţea, L. G.; MotoC, R. M.; PopesCu, C.F.; BarbaCar, N.; IanCu, D.;
ConstantinesCu, C.; Barbarii, L.E.; 2010: Genetic proling of nine
grapevine cultivars from Romania, based on SSR markers. Romanian
Biotechnological Letters 15,116-124.
Gheţea, L. G.; MotoC, R. M.; PopesCu, C. F.; BărbăCar, N.; Bărbării, L.
E.; ConstantinesCu, C. M.; ianCu, D.; Bătrânu, T.; Bivol, I.; BaCa, I.;
Savin, G.; 2012: Assessment of diversity in grapevine gene pools from
Romania and Republic of Moldova, based on SSR markers analysis.
In: a. i. luna MalDonaDo (Ed.): Horticulture. InTech, Rijeka, Croatia.
Gorjan, S. S.; botu, M.; 2013: Description of some old varieties of grape
vines from Dragasani vineyard-Romania. Univ. Craiova, seria Hor-
ticultura XVIII, 171-178.
InDreas, A.; Visan, L.; 2001: Principalele soiuri de struguri pentru vin
cultivate in Romania. Ed. Ceres Bucuresti, Romania.
ionesCu De la braD, i.; 1868: Agricultura Română din Judeţul Mehedinţi,
Bucureşti, Romania.
jahnKe, G.; Majer, j.; laKatos, a.; GyoerFFyne Molnar, j.; DeaK, e.;
steFanovits-banyai, e.; varGa, P.; 2009. Isoenzyme and microsat-
ellite analysis of Vitis vinifera L. varieties from the Hungarian grape
germplasm. Scientia Horticulturae, The Netherlands, 120, 213-221.
KalinowsKi, S. T.; taper, M. L.; Marshall, T. C.; 2007: Revising how
the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error
increases success in paternity assignment. Mol. Ecol. 16, 1099-1106.
Kotinis, C.; 1984: Atlas Ampélographique des Cépages cultivés en Grèce.
Ministry of Agriculture, Athens, Greece.
laCoMbe, T.; boursiquot, J. M.; lauCou, V.; Di veCChi-staraz, M.; peros,
J. P.; this, P.; 2013: Large-scale parentage analysis in an extended
set of grapevine cultivars (Vitis vinifera L.). Theor. Appl. Genet.
126, 401-414.
lauCou, V.; laCoMbe, T.; DeChesne, F.; siret, R.; bruno, J. P.; Dessup,
M.; Dessup, T.; ortiGosa, P.; parra, P.; roux, C.; santoni, S.; vares,
D.; péros, J. P.; boursiquot, J. M.; this, P.; 2011: High throughput
analysis of grape genetic diversity as a tool for germplasm collection
management. Theor. Appl. Genet. 122,1233-1245.
Maletić, E.; seFC, K. M.; steinKellner, H.; kontić, J. K.; Pejić, I.; 1999:
Genetic characterization of Croatian grapevine cultivars and detection
of synonymous cultivars in neighbouring regions. Vitis 38, 79-83.
Maletić, e.; kontić, j. k.; ilijas, i. 2015: Green book: indigenous grape-
vine varieties of Croatia. State Institute for Nature Protection.
Maul, e.; suDharMa, K. n.; KeCKe, s.; Marx, G.; Müller, C.; auDeGuin,
l.; boselli, M.; boursiquot, j. M.; buCChetti, b.; Cabello, F.; Car-
raro, r.; Crespan, M.; De anDrés, M. t.; eiras Dias, j.; eKhvaia,
j.; GaForio, l.; GarDiMan, M.; GranDo, s.; Gyropoulos, D.; jan-
Durova, o.; kiss, e.; kontić, j.; kozMa, P.; laCoMbe, t.; lauCou, v.;
leGranD, D.; MaGhraDze, D.; Marinoni, D.; Maletić, e.; Moreira,
F.; Muñoz-orGanero, G.; nakhutsrishvili, G.; Pejić, i.; PeterlunGer,
e.; pitsoli, D.; pospisilova, D.; preiner, D.; raiMonDi, s.; reGner,
F.; savin, G.; savviDes, s.; sChneiDer, a.; sereno, C.; siMon, S.;
2012: The European Vitis Database ( – a technical
innovation through an online uploading and interactive modication
system. Vitis, 51, 79-86.
Maul, E.; eibaCh, R.; zyprian, E.; töpFer, R; 2015: The prolic grape
variety (Vitis vinifera L.) 'Heunisch Weiss' (= 'Gouais blanc'): bud
mutants, "colored" homonyms and further offspring. Vitis, 54, 79-86.
MiGliaro, D.; Morreale, G.; GarDiMan, M.; lanDolFo, S.; Crespan, M.;
2013: A third-generation DNA polymerase coupled with a multiplex
PCR system speed up diagnostics for grapevines identication. Plant
Genet. Res. 11, 182-185.
néMeth, M.; 1970: Ampelográai Album. Termesztettborszőlőfajták 2.
Mezőgazdasági Kiadó, Budapest.
niColea nu, G. N.; 1900: Introduction à l′Ampélographie Roumaine,
Ministére de L′Agriculture, du Commerce, de L′Industrie et des
Domaines, Service Viticole Bucarest.
OIV; 2009: OIV Descriptor List for Grapevine Varieties and Vitis species,
2nd ed. O I V (Off. Int. Vigne Vin), Paris, France.
OIV; 2013: International List of Vine Varieties and their Synonyms. O
I V (Off. Int. Vigne Vin), Paris, France (
medias/2273/oiv-liste-publication-2013-complete.pdf ).
rotaru, l.; 2009 : Soiuri de vita de vie pentru struguri de vin. Ed.Ion
Ionescu de la Brad Iasi, p. 284
Rustioni, L. ; MaGhraDze, D.; Pop esCu, C. F.; Cola, G.; AbashiDze,
E.; Aroutiounian, R.; Brazão, J.; Coletti, S.; Cornea, V.; Dejeu,
L.; Dinu, D.; Eiras Dias, J. E.; Fiori, S.; Goryslavets, S.; Ibáñez,
J; KoCsis, L.; Lorenzini, F.; Maletić, E.; MaMasaKhlisashvili, L.;
MarGaryan, K.; MDinaraDze, I.; MeMetova, E.; MonteMayor, M. I.;
Muñoz-OrGanero, G.; NeMet h, G.; NiKolaou, N.; RaiMonDi, S.;
Risovanna, V.; SaKaveli, F.; Savin, G.; SavviDes, S.; SChneiDer, A.;
SChwanDer, F.; SprinG, J. L.; Pastore, G.; Preiner, D.; UjMajuriDze,
L.; Zioziou, E.; Maul, E.; BaCilieri, R.; Failla, O.; 2014: First re-
sults of the European grapevine collections' collaborative network:
validation of a standard eno-carpological phenotyping method. Vitis,
53, 219-226.
Žulj Mihalević, M.; ŠiMon, S.; Pejić, I.; CarKa, F.; sevo, R.; KojiC, A.;
GaŠi, F.; toMić, L.; jovanović Cvetković, T.; Maletić, E.; preiner,
D.; boŽinović, Z.; savin, G.; Cornea, V.; MaraŠ, V.; toMić MuGoŠa,
M.; botu, M.; popa, A.; belesKi, K.; 2013: Molecular characterization
of old local grapevine varieties from South East European countries.
Vitis, 52, 69-76.
Received May 3, 2017
Accepted August 31, 2017
... The series of seven "Ampelografia of the Romanian People's Republic" published between 1959 and 1966 with the detailed description of the old grapevine varieties and the works of Indreas and Visan (2001) and Rotaru (2009) about those considered of economic importance, are the reference literature for the field of ampelography. In the last two decades, for many of the vine varieties considered valuable and important for the production of grapes and wine, the ampelographic description was completed with molecular characterization (Bodea et al., 2009;Butiuc-Keul et al., 2010;Coste et al., 2010;Gheorghe et al., 2008;Gheţea et al., 2010 andPopescu et al., 2017). ...
... The genetic profile of each accession was obtained (Popescu et al., 2017) and the results were certified after comparison with three databases: Vitis International Variety Catalogue (VIVC) (, CREA-Viticulture and Enology molecular database (partially published) and INRA database. ...
... B. Some synonymies presented in reference old literature were not confirmed and new ones or different from previous statements were found: -ʻBusuioacă de Bohotinʼ had the same SSR profile with ʻMuscat à petits grains blancsʼ, but a different colour of the berries; thus, it can be concluded that ʻBusuioacă de Bohotinʼ is the red somatic variant for berry colour of ʻMuscat à petits grains blancsʼ and not a synonym with ʻMuscat rouge de Madereʼ as mentioned Constantinescu et al. (1960); -ʻGalbenă uriaşăʼ SSR profile matched that of ʻMirkovacaʼ, an endangered Croatian variety described by Maletić et al. (1999); so, the present results proved that ʻGalbenă uriaşăʼ is not a clonal variant of ʻGalbenă de Odobeştiʼ as mentioned Constantinescu et al. (1961); -ʻTămâioasă româneascăʼ accession, one of the most important and appreciated grapevine varieties in Romania, was proven not to share the same SSR profile of ʻMuscat à petits grains blancsʼ, and therefore not to be a synonym with it, as mentioned by Constantinescu et al. (1960). Because the investigated accession seemed to be similar to those from other collections, it is supposed the existence of a mixture of at least two varieties of ʻTămâioasă românescăʼ in Romanian vineyards and, accordingly, Popescu et al. (2017) recommended the study of the mix of varieties in old ʻMuscat à petits grains blancsʼ vineyards all over the country. 196 C. Synonyms were found for some accessions for which there is no information in the Romanian ampelographic literature, such as: ...
Full-text available
Aiming to investigate the correspondence of phenotypic variability and molecular markers, 50 varieties of Vitis vinifera ssp. vinifera, ancient grapevine varieties grown on Romanian territory, were selected to be analysed. All varieties were subjected to ampelographic analyses with OIV descriptors and also to molecular analyses with 13 microsatellites. The morphology description with recommended methods corresponded with the reference literature, proving the correct registration of the varieties at the moment of acquisition. Markers efficiency for assessing the genetic diversity among studied varieties was evaluated by computation of statistic parameters referring to the polymorphisms found. Among the internationally recommended SSR markers, ISV4 and VMCNG4b9 markers displayed interesting PIC and PI values. By comparing the SSR profiles of the 50 Romanian grapevine varieties with those in the Eu database, the following can be concluded: confirmation of 10 synonymies mentioned in old documents, while 3 synonymies mentioned in old reference literature were not confirmed, new synonyms were found for 4 accessions, additional synonyms were found for 4 accessions, which are to be added to the previous ones already mentioned in the literature, the synonymies in three groups of accessions were documented for the first time in the specialised literature, the unicity of three Romanian accessions was proved (ʻMoroştinăʼ, ʻNegru mareʼ and ʻRomânieʼ) and the genetic profiles of 15 varieties were identical to those already recorded in the investigated databases
... Knezovic et al. (2017) reported that both methods are essential method in identifying similarities and differences between varieties in the study where they used 16 OIV characters and 9 SSR markers in the definition of 10 native vine genotypes with the same name in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Popescu et al. (2017) concluded that both the ampelographic and SSR marker method were effective in identifying the genetic types of grapevine and misnamed genotypes in the grapevine gene banks in identifying grapevine genetic resources in Romania. Ferlito et al. (2018) reported that SSR markers also help differentiate varieties. ...
Full-text available
Turkey is within the region where the viticulture has been traditionally practiced since ancient times. The Cappadocia location, including the province of Kayseri, is an important grape production area with its autochthonous grape cultivars and unique tradition in history. Due to viticulture history, this region is rich in vine genetic resources. This survey study was carried out in vineyards areas and residential gardens in 23 different regions of Kayseri province between 2017 and 2019. A total of 174 local genotypes from different locations were determined and were further examined through molecular characterization with SSR markers. A total of 112 bands were amplified by 12 SSR primers, all of which were polymorphic with a 100% polymorphism. The highest number of polymorphic bands (18) was produced by the primer Scu8vv, while the lowest number of polymorphic bands (3) was found in VMC8D3 and VMC8E6. An UPGMA dendrogram was created via scoring the bands and the genetic similarity between the genotypes was determined between 0.63–1.0. In conclusion, a wide range of genetic diversity was determined in grapes of Kayseri indicating an ancient residential germplasm collection that could be used for breeding studies.
... Farana de Mascara and Farana Blanc which are genetically identical pair (Laiadi et al., 2009) showed the same possibilities in morphological traits with Cherchelli, relationship which confirmed by molecular analysis. Density of hairs could have separated our grape varieties, as is the case with other authors (Karatas et al., 2014;Boso et al., 2005;Garcia-Munoz et al., 2011;Popescu et al., 2017), who have obtained similar results with different grape varieties. We noticed that some qualitative parameters are less representative in our study where revealed no difference between the grape varieties. ...
This study was conducted in three vegetation successive periods (2015, 2016, and 2017) to determine ampelographic characteristics of the 36 grapevine varieties grown in the Eastern Algerian germplasm collection by a total of 108 ampelographic criteria using OIV descriptors. The data were processed by multivariate statistical procedures. A number of factors have been well identified in the classification of grape varieties studied, some are quantitative in particular the length of veins from N1 to N5 (OIV601, OIV602, OIV603, OIV604, OIV611), length of petiole sinus to upper and lower lateral leaf sinus (OIV605, OIV606) and fruit production represented by the bunch size (OIV202, OIV203) and weight (OIV502), while the qualitative parameters related mainly to the density of hairs for the young shoot (OIV004), density of prostrate and erect hairs on and between main veins on lower side of blade young leaf (OIV053, OIV054, OIV055, OIV056, respectively) and density of prostrate hairs between the main veins on lower side of blade mature leaf (OIV084). The results obtained by all parameters together confirmed the synonymy between varieties already found previously by molecular SSR markers in particular between both varieties as Bouaber des Aures, Kabyle Aldebert; Ahmar Mechtras II, Ahmar Mechtras III; Farana Blanc, Farana de Mascara; Aneb Kabyle, Ahmed draa Mizen and between three cultivars Lekhzine, Ahchichene, Adari des Bibans. However, the problem of synonymy remains invalid between Louali and El wali, despite the close convergence between them, especially in ampelographic quantitative measured criteria.
Full-text available
Nowadays, microsatellite loci represent molecular markers of choice for assessing genetic identities and phylogenetic relationships between different grapevine varieties and gene pools. In the present study, a genetic characterization of nine grapevine cultivars, from the National Institute for Biotechnologies in Horticulture, Ştefăneşti-Argeş collection, was carried out, based on 15 microsatellite markers. These are among the most important cultivars encountered in Romanian vineyards, four of them non-autochtonous -Muscat Ottonel, Italian Riesling, Cabernet Sauvignon, Sauvignon, and five of Romanian origin -Tămâioasă Românească, Negru aromat, Fetească albă, Fetească regală, Fetească neagră. The results obtained on the studied cultivars revealed the existence of some genetic particularities – conserved allelic variants, alleles significantly different (in base pairs number) from those already identified in other gene pools -which are the consequence of local molecular evolution mechanisms action, making the Romanian Vitis vinifera gene pool valuable as grapevine genetic resource in the world.
Full-text available
Microsatellite allele sizes were determined at twelve loci in 115 grape genotypes, including 88 ancient Vitis vinifera L. cultivars indigenous to the Carpathian Ba-sin. Pairwise comparison of the microsatellite data led to the identification of ambiguous nomenclature and es-tablished differences between two grapevine cultivars, Leányka and Leányszőlő, previously thought of as iden-tical. The data also disproved erroneous assumptions about the parentage of two additional cultivars, one of which was 'Csabagyöngye' ('Pearl of Csaba'), an eco-nomically important grapevine and a renowned genetic resource for grape breeding. The results also pointed to several possible parent-progeny relationships which will be subject to further pedigree studies. The DNA typing information was used to construct a barcode sys-tem which was incorporated into the Hungarian Vitis Microsatellite Database for efficient and unambiguous identification of grape genotypes, thereby increasing the precision with which genetic resources are managed in Hungary. K e y w o r d s : Vitis vinifera, microsatellite, SSR, geno-type, DNA barcode, cultivar, Carpathian Basin.
Full-text available
To estimate genetic relationships among 36 local vine cultivars, RAPD analysis was performed with 24 decamer primers selected from a total of 40 primers. These primers generated polymorphic bands among the studied genotypes. The purity and amount (ng/µL) of total DNA extracted from each sample were sufficient for optimal RAPD analysis. UPGMA dendrogram was constructed based on genetic distances using the program Tree View. The genotypes analyzed clustered into three main groups and the values of genetic distances between data shows that there are differences at molecular level.
Full-text available
Inheritance of nuclear microsatellite markers (nSSR) has been proved to be a powerful tool to verify or uncover the parentage of grapevine cultivars. The aim of the present study was to undertake an extended parentage analysis using a large sample of Vitis vinifera cultivars held in the INRA "Domaine de Vassal" Grape Germplasm Repository (France). A dataset of 2,344 unique genotypes (i.e. cultivars without synonyms, clones or mutants) identified using 20 nSSR was analysed with FAMOZ software. Parentages showing a logarithm of odds score higher than 18 were validated in relation to the historical data available. The analysis first revealed the full parentage of 828 cultivars resulting in: (1) 315 original full parentages uncovered for traditional cultivars, (2) 100 full parentages confirming results established with molecular markers in prior papers and 32 full parentages that invalidated prior results, (3) 255 full parentages confirming pedigrees as disclosed by the breeders and (4) 126 full parentages that invalidated breeders' data. Second, incomplete parentages were determined in 1,087 cultivars due to the absence of complementary parents in our cultivar sample. Last, a group of 276 genotypes showed no direct relationship with any other cultivar in the collection. Compiling these results from the largest set of parentage data published so far both enlarges and clarifies our knowledge of the genetic constitution of cultivated V. vinifera germplasm. It also allows the identification of the main genitors involved in varietal assortment evolution and grapevine breeding.
Full-text available
Twenty two grapevine cultivars were genotyped at six microsatellite loci (VVMD5, VVMD7, VVMD27, VVS2, VrZAG62, VrZAG79) in order to characterize their genetic diversity and to establish the maintenance of their identity and purity throughout two different national germplasm collections and one private collection from Romania. A total of 62 alleles were detected, giving a mean of 5.94 alleles per 6 loci. The total number of alleles per locus varied between 8 to 12 and the polymorphism information content ranged from 0.72 to 0.85, indicating that these loci were highly informative. We established that the genetic identity of the analyzed cultivars was well preserved in both germplasm banks but not always in the private collection. Genetic characterization of grapevine cultivars can certify their authenticity and purity, two features that are of prime importance, especially in relation to quality control and consumer information. Where possible results were compared and proved to be consistent with those existing in the European Vitis Database.
Full-text available
Twenty-two native Croatian grapevine varieties representing three different growing and climatic regions (Dalmatia, Istria, continental Croatia) have been genotyped at nine SSR loci. The identical genotypes of the Croatian cultivars Plavina and Brajdica confirmed the hypothesis they are the same variety. Comparing the SSR profiles of the Croatian cultivars with the profiles stored in a database containing about 300 European cultivars, further three pairs of synonyms were revealed: Teran Bijeli shares its genotype with the Italian cultivar Prosecco, Muskat Ruza Porecki corresponds to cv. Rosenmuskateller from North Italy and Moslavac is identical to the Hungarian variety Furmint. The microsatellite-based definitions of these synonyms are strongly supported by ampelographic observations. The genetic variability within the investigated Croatian cultivars was high with a genetic diversity of 75%. A dendrogram based on allele sharing distances reflected neither common morphological features nor common geographic origins of the cultivars.
The action aimed at establishing a collaborative partnership among the countries that share the grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) gene pool with the main object to define a core collection able to represent and conserve the highest genetic diversity with the lowest number of plant accessions. The action involved 25 Cost countries and 10 non Cost countries, which represent quite all the range of the Old World viticulture. Around 250 scientists (40.6 % female; 17.5 % Early Stage Researchers (ESRs)) participated to the collaborative activities in which more than 30 institution were actively involved. Forty-four Short Term Scientific Missions (STSMs) were completed more than two thirds made by ESRs. An original Ampelography Book describing a large sample of elite grape cultivars selected from the native Caucasus and Black northern sea region was published and more than 100 research papers were produced (63 in the present action final publication). Networks of collaborative activities were consolidated. Concrete results involved all the objects of the action, including germplasm identification, testing of advanced genotyping methodologies, accessions phenotyping for phenology, grapes quality potential and mildew resistances; methods for association genetics; procedures for sanitary managements of collections, safe conservation and germplasm circulation. Protocols for phenotyping were released and successfully tested in a large set of grapevine germplasm collections. More than 1000 accessions were genotyped. The design of a tentative core collection referred to east European germplasm was completed.
'Heunisch Weiss' (syn. 'Gouais blanc') contributed to a considerable increase of our varietal assortment, including renowned varieties like 'Chardonnay' and 'Riesling Weiss'. Three phenotypic variants of 'Heunisch Weiss' were discovered in the grapevine collection at the JKI Institute for Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof: (a) 'Heunisch Dreifarbig' (three coloured 'Heunisch'; VC prime name 'Heunisch Dreifarbig') expressing intense anthocyanin coloration on shoots, inflorescences and leaf petioles before fruit set and even red berry skin at fruit set stage; (b) 'Pekasore' (VC prime name 'Heunisch Rotgestreift'; red striped 'Heunisch';) with rose to red stripes on white berries and (c) the stenospermocarpic 'Aspirant' (VC prime name 'Heunisch Weiss Seedless'). Four cultivars proving to be homonymous in relation to 'Heunisch' were investigated at 24 loci to determine their identity or relatedness to 'Heunisch Weiss', respectively. 'Heunisch Schwarz' turned out to be a 'Heunisch Weiss' offspring. No parent offspring relationship was detected for 'Heunisch Rot', 'Haenisch Rot' = 'Pamid', and 'Heunisch Blau'. Ampelographic description was carried out for some of the accessions to trace back historical evidences. In addition five new 'Heunisch Weiss' offsprings were identified and confirmed by analysing 35 nuclear microsatellite loci. The accession 'Furmint Apiren' turned out to be a seedless bud mutant of the 'Heunisch Weiss' offspring 'Iordan'.