Fringillidae (1 Viewer)

Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, Pablo Gomez-Prieto and Valentin Ruiz-del-Valle, 2009. Phylogeography of Finches and Sparrows.
Abstract and open access item here
Also this thread

Zuccon et al

Zuccon, Prŷs-Jones, Rasmussen & Ericson (in press). The phylogenetic relationships and generic limits of finches (Fringillidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol.

Abstract
The phylogenetic relationships among the true finches (Fringillidae) have been confounded by the recurrence of similar plumage patterns and use of similar feeding niches. Using a dense taxon sampling and a combination of nuclear and mitochondrial sequences we reconstructed a well resolved and strongly supported phylogenetic hypothesis for this family. We identified three well supported, subfamily level clades: the Holoarctic genus Fringilla (subfamly Fringillinae), the Neotropical Euphonia and Chlorophonia (subfamily Euphoniinae), and the more widespread subfamily Carduelinae for the remaining taxa. Although usually separated in a different family-group taxon (Drepanidinae), the Hawaiian honeycreepers are deeply nested within the Carduelinae and sister to a group of Asian Carpodacus. Other new relationships recovered by this analysis include the placement of the extinct Chaunoproctus ferreorostris as sister to some Asian Carpodacus, a clade combining greenfinches (Carduelis chloris and allies), Rhodospiza and Rhynchostruthus, and a well-supported clade with the aberrant Callacanthis and Pyrrhoplectes together with Carpodacus rubescens. Although part of the large Carduelis-Serinus complex, the poorly known Serinus estherae forms a distinct lineage without close relatives. The traditionally delimited genera Carduelis, Serinus, Carpodacus, Pinicola and Euphonia are polyphyletic or paraphyletic. Following our results we propose a revised generic classification of finches and describe a new monotypic genus for Carpodacus rubescens.
SMNH.

Richard Klim said:

Zuccon, Prŷs-Jones, Rasmussen & Ericson (in press). The phylogenetic relationships and generic limits of finches (Fringillidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol.

Abstract
The phylogenetic relationships among the true finches (Fringillidae) have been confounded by the recurrence of similar plumage patterns and use of similar feeding niches. Using a dense taxon sampling and a combination of nuclear and mitochondrial sequences we reconstructed a well resolved and strongly supported phylogenetic hypothesis for this family. We identified three well supported, subfamily level clades: the Holoarctic genus Fringilla (subfamly Fringillinae), the Neotropical Euphonia and Chlorophonia (subfamily Euphoniinae), and the more widespread subfamily Carduelinae for the remaining taxa. Although usually separated in a different family-group taxon (Drepanidinae), the Hawaiian honeycreepers are deeply nested within the Carduelinae and sister to a group of Asian Carpodacus. Other new relationships recovered by this analysis include the placement of the extinct Chaunoproctus ferreorostris as sister to some Asian Carpodacus, a clade combining greenfinches (Carduelis chloris and allies), Rhodospiza and Rhynchostruthus, and a well-supported clade with the aberrant Callacanthis and Pyrrhoplectes together with Carpodacus rubescens. Although part of the large Carduelis-Serinus complex, the poorly known Serinus estherae forms a distinct lineage without close relatives. The traditionally delimited genera Carduelis, Serinus, Carpodacus, Pinicola and Euphonia are polyphyletic or paraphyletic. Following our results we propose a revised generic classification of finches and describe a new monotypic genus for Carpodacus rubescens.
SMNH.

Click to expand...

Brilliant! Thanks Richard :t:
Much of this was suspected or expected but still a few surprises yet in the fringillidae!
I imagine Serinus estherae will need a new generic name. Also I wonder if the various isolated subspecies of estherae are really separate species.
Looking forward to reading this one!!

Aha John Boyd got there first of course
Chrysocorythus for S. estherae

Acanthis said:

Aha John Boyd got there first of course
Chrysocorythus for S. estherae

Click to expand...

Just waiting on a three way split for estherae now :t:

Chris

Zuccon et al

Richard Klim said:

Zuccon, Prŷs-Jones, Rasmussen & Ericson (in press). The phylogenetic relationships and generic limits of finches (Fringillidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol.

Click to expand...

Now online: [abstract]

Taxonomic recommendations wrt Dickinson 2003 (H&M3):

• Three subfamilies:
  • Fringillinae (Fringilla only)
  • Euphoniinae (Euphonia & Chlorophonia)
  • Carduelinae (incl Hawaiian drepanids)
• Kozlowia to Carpodacus
• Uragus to Carpodacus
• Pinicola subhimachala to Carpodacus subhimachalus
• Carpodacus erythrinus to Erythrina erythrina
• Carpodacus nipalensis to Procarduelis
• Carpodacus rubescens to Agraphospiza gen n
• Carpodacus mexicanus, C purpureus & C cassinii to Haemorhous
• Serinus restricted to S alario, S canaria, S canicollis, S pusillus, S serinus & S syriacus
• Other African & Arabian Serinus to Crithagra
• Neospiza to Crithagra
• Serinus estherae to Chrysocorythus
• Carduelis ambigua, C chloris, C monguilloti, C sinica & C spinoides to Chloris
• American Carduelis & C spinus to Spinus
• Serinus thibetanus to Spinus
• Carduelis cannabina, C flavirostris, C johannis & C yemenensis to Linaria
• Carduelis flammea & C hornemanni to Acanthis

Zuccon et al - Bucanetes

Although not explicitly mentioned in the taxonomic recommendations section, the tree diagram additionally indicates the merging of Bucanetes (recognition of Eremopsaltria for B mongolicus is not supported) into Rhodopechys. Perhaps this will be clarified in the final version.

Which asian Carpodacus relate to 1. the Drepanidines and 2. Chaunoproctus?

chris butterworth said:

Just waiting on a three way split for estherae now :t:

Chris

Click to expand...

Chris. There's 4 named taxa and one unnamed so far isn't there? If the split goes ahead will it be along Island lines?

Why Haemorhous for the American ex-Carpodacus rather than Burrica as John Boyd has?

Snapdragyn said:

Why Haemorhous for the American ex-Carpodacus rather than Burrica as John Boyd has?

Click to expand...

Burrica Ridgway, 1887 (Proposed as a subgenus, under Carpodacus)
Richmond Index

Zuccon et al: "...for which we propose to resurrect the genus
name Haemorhous Swainson, 1837 (type species Fringilla purpurea Gmelin, 1789, gender masculine)..."

Acanthis said:

Which asian Carpodacus relate to 1. the Drepanidines and 2. Chaunoproctus?

Click to expand...

The drepanid lineage is sister to a large clade comprising Carpodacus, Chaunoproctus, Haematospiza and Erythrina (all sensu the recommendations in post #6).

PS. Just noticed that although the taxonomic recommendations propose the transfer of Carpodacus erythrinus to Erythrina Brehm 1829, the tree diagram indicates transfer to Erythrospiza. I assume that the former is correct.

Richard Klim said:

The drepanid lineage is sister to a large clade comprising Carpodacus, Chaunoproctus, Haematospiza and Erythrina (all sensu the recommendations in post #6).

PS. Just noticed that although the taxonomic recommendations propose the transfer of Carpodacus erythrinus to Erythrina Brehm 1829, the tree diagram indicates transfer to Erythrospiza. I assume that the former is correct.

Click to expand...

Ah good. It wasn't clear from reading the abstract whether the H.H.s were sister to Carpodacus etc or sister to a particular group of Rosefinches say Erythrina. That would've rather complicated things.

So basically the proposed revision differs from John Boyd's treatment of the family ( http://jboyd.net/Taxo/List29.html#fringillidae ) in just a few ways:

1/ Haemorhous instead of Burrica
2/ The treatment of Kozlowia, Uragus & Propyrrhula (and possibly Pyrrhospiza? ) as parts of Carpodacus
3/ The new genus Agraphospiza for Carp. rubescens. Boyd uses Procarduelis rubescens
4/ Carpodacus/Erythrina/Haematospiza sister to H. Honeycreepers instead of the Pyrrhulines ( Pyrrhula, Leucosticte etc)
5/ A large Crithagra instead of Crithagra, Dendrospiza, Ochrospiza & Pseudochloroptila
6/ Neospiza subsumed in Crithagra - I remember reading somewhere that one subspecies of Principe Seedeater Crithagra rufobrunnea was found to be closer to Sao Tome Grosbeak than another. Not sure if that's been published though. Suggests a possible future split of Principe Seedeater.
7/ Astragalinus, Sporagra, & Chionomitris lumped with Spinus
8/ Rhodopechys encompassing Rhodopechys, Bucanetes & Eremopsaltria

Carpodacus

Incidentally, although Pamela Rasmussen is one of the authors, Zuccon et al make no reference to her rosefinch splits (Rasmussen 2005, Revised species limits and field identification of Asian rosefinches).

TiF

John Boyd (TiF):
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html [2 Nov 2011]
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/List29.html#fringillidae
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/Fringillidae.pdf

[See also Lerner et al 2011: www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=214539]

Euphonia

According to the abstract, Euphonia is paraphyletic (obviously with respect to Chlorophonia) - does anyone know which Euphonia species fall outside of the genus?

thyoloalethe said:

According to the abstract, Euphonia is paraphyletic (obviously with respect to Chlorophonia) - does anyone know which Euphonia species fall outside of the genus?

Click to expand...

Euphonia musica and Chlorophonia cyanea form the most basal branch in the Euphonia clade (E. chlorotica, finschi, xanthogaster, cayennensis, rufiventris, minuta, laniirostris and violacea).

Peter Kovalik said:

Euphonia musica and Chlorophonia cyanea form the most basal branch in the Euphonia clade (E. chlorotica, finschi, xanthogaster, cayennensis, rufiventris, minuta, laniirostris and violacea).

Click to expand...

So probably not yet enough species sampled but those results suggest including the 'Cyanophonia' group within Chlorophonia, or a separate genus - Cyanophonia, or placing the whole lot in Euphonia.

Acanthis said:

So probably not yet enough species sampled but those results suggest including the 'Cyanophonia' group within Chlorophonia, or a separate genus - Cyanophonia, or placing the whole lot in Euphonia.

Click to expand...

November 11, 2011 http://jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html
Following up on a comment on BirdForum: Golden-rumped Euphonia, Euphonia cyanocephala, Antillean Euphonia, Euphonia musica, and Elegant Euphonia, Euphonia elegantissima have been transferred to genus Cyanophonia. This is consistent with Zuccon et al. (2012).

Richard said “PS. Just noticed that although the taxonomic recommendations propose the transfer of Carpodacus erythrinus to Erythrina Brehm 1829, the tree diagram indicates transfer to Erythrospiza. I assume that the former is correct.”

Sulla seconda edizione del Regno Animale Barone Cuvier osservazioni di Carlo Luciano Bonaparte principe di Musignano. Bologna Tip. Marsigli. 8ͦ di pag. 175.

(Inserite negli Annali di Storia Naturale, Fascicoli 10, 11 e 12. Bologna 1830); Saggio di una .

“Erythrospiza, Bp., was established before the " Saggio," pp. 53, 141 (1831), in the work which bears the title ' Sulla seconda edizione del Regno Animale del Barone Cuvier; Osservazioni," p. 80 (1830), (cf. Ibis, 1888, p. 320, note).” Tomas Salvidori .

Page 212 of : http://books.google.de/books?id=-HB...tcover&hl=it#v=onepage&q=Erythrospiza&f=false .

Persisto nell' idea di formare un gruppo di queste Fringillo-Pyrrhulae che si tingono di ros■o ( Vedi le mie Osservazioni sulla Synopsis degli Uccelli Messicani del Sig. Swainson , nella Contribuzioni del Liceo Macluriano nel qual luogo f ho chiamato Erythrospiza. )

Persisted in the 'idea of forming a group of these Fringilla Pyrrhulae- ros, which are colored or ■ (See my remarks on the Synopsis of the Birds of Mexico Mr. Swainson, in Contributions of the School Maclure in which place I called Erythrospiza .)
My group Erythrospiza species include the following,
t. Purple finch, Gm. (Wils. plate. 7. £ 4. M. to. Feather wedding t 4 »- f-3 in winter) WADA. Week
a-Pyrrhula frontalis, Nob. pl. 6. f. 1. m. fye ( Fringilla frontalis, Say nec Auct.) WADA. Sept. to the rocky mountains. Mr. Swainson was found in Mexico.
Self Pyrrhula githaginea, Tecirn. with. 4 00, (Fringilla githaginea, Licht.) d 'Egypt , and Nubia, and it sometimes shows in the south of Europe 'as guarantee. It is also figured in the great work on Egypt tab. 5. f. 8., Except that by Mr. Roux.
4. Loxia sibirica Falck. voy. ut. p. 3ob. t. 18 f, 1. and 1. m. and f. Pali. Gm. Lath. (Pyrrhula longicauda, Temme.) Siberia and Japan in the winter migrates to the southern European Russia also, and even Hungary.
5. Loxia rosea. Pali. Nahum. n3. f. 3. (Pyrrhula rosy , Temiti.) of Siberia and of the 'Eastern Europe' s: 1 visit accidentally 'Hungary.
6. Loxia Erythrina, Pali. Nahum. pl. n3. fia ( Pyrrhula Erythrina , Temme.) ( Loxia cardinalis, nec Besek Auct.) of the Arctic regions of Asia and Europe, common in some provinces of Russia is seen by accident in Germany.
7. Pyrrhula synoica, Temme. [Bouvreuil social) more. with. 37S. f. 1. maf d 'Egypt.
To secure these species probably should be expanded.
8. Loxia rubicilla, Lath. Gmel. Daud. Shaw. (Nov. Petr Comm. XIX. P. 463. T Ia.) Caneasian Gros-beak English Writers, beo du Gros Caucase the French, even when it is not identical with any of the above, for example with ' Erythrina.

Newton says: “Bonaparte stated {Proc. Zool. Soc.1837, p. 101) that in 1826 he had proposed the name paradiseus for this species, and had communicated a notice of it to an American journal. There seems no reason to doubt his statement, and the journal was most likely the Contributions of the Maclurian Lyceum, published at Philadelphia (1827-29), to which, as he says in his Sulla seconda edizione del Regno Animale del Barone Cuvier Osservazioni (Bologna: 1830, p. 80), he sent some remarks on Swainson's Synopsis of the Birds of Mexico, and believed they had been printed there. But these Contributions unfortunately came to an end with the third number, and the only article by Bonaparte they contain is a Catalogue of the Birds of the United States (pp. 8-34), so that his criticism of Swainson's paper (which had appeared in the Philosophical Magazine for 1827), though doubtless accepted for publication, has never seen the light.”
Here is the Contributions of the Maclurian Lyceum:
http://books.google.com/books?id=5EJDAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false .

C. L. Bonaparte wrote Swainson on July 30, 1830 from Florence, concerning notes on Swainson’s Mexican Birds.

The use of Erythrospiza in Sulla seconde etc. has no description, since Bonaparte thought his description got published, but I think it is not nomen nudem because he lists all the species in the genus.
But Erythrina has priority as used in Isis by Brehm in 1828 and 1829 for E. albifrons and rubrifrons in 1829 and E. rosea and rubrifrons in 1828. Priority is confirmed by Bonaparte referring to Erythrina in Sulla seconda etc.