• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Eared pheasants (1 Viewer)

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Li, Zhu, Liu, Zhuge, Su & Wang 2010. Assessment of Genetic Diversity in Chinese Eared Pheasant using Fluorescent-AFLP Markers. Mol Phyl Evol: in press.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=ac1fb6c94eda424b593506d5407a3efb

[Crossoptilon harmani is recognised as a species by IOC, BLI, OBC, China OS and Madge & McGowan 2002 (Pheasants etc);
but treated as a ssp of C crossoptilon by Dickinson 2003 (H&M3) and Cornell/Clements.]

Richard
 
Last edited:
Crossoptilon auritum

Langyu Gu, Yang Liu, Pinjia Que, Zhengwang Zhang. Quaternary climate and environmental changes have shaped genetic differentiation in a Chinese pheasant endemic to the eastern margin of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, In Press, Accepted Manuscript.
Abstract
 
Blue Eared Pheasant

Ren, Li, Yuan, Chen, Zhang, Guo, Jiang, Wang & Kan (in press). Complete mitochondrial genome of the Blue Eared Pheasant, Crossoptilon auritum (Galliformes: Phasianidae). Mitochondrial DNA. [abstract]
 
Xuejuan Li, Yuan Huang, Fumin Lei. Comparative mitochondrial genomics and phylogenetic relationships of the Crossoptilon species (Phasianidae, Galliformes). BMC Genomics 2015, 16:42 (5 February 2015).

[PDF]
 
Crossoptilon crossoptilon drouynii

Would anybody know why the name of this ssp is usually attributed to Verreaux 1868, spelling "drouynii", in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Hist. Nat. 4(2):85 [here], rather than to Milne Edwards 1868, spelling "drouinii", in C.-R. Hebd. Séan. Acad. Sci. Paris 66:787 [here]?

Verreaux himself attributed the name to Milne Edwards (albeit without referring to a publication); the last page of his paper bears the date of 11 July 1868 ([p.89]; this is presumably the date of redaction, publication must have occurred later). The note in Comptes-Rendus is from the séance of 20 April; the description is admittedly minimal there, but IMO sufficient to confer availability to the name.
 
Supposedly A. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Verreaux(?) named another game bird for this person L. lhuysii .
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/27214#page/307/mode/1up .
This is the report of an announcement by "M. Geoffroy" (Albert Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire; the report starts on [p.221]) about birds received by the jardin d'acclimatation from "M. Dabry" (Claude Philibert Dabry de Thiersant). The author of the name there is Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire alone. The bird was subsequently described in a much more detailed way, in 1867, in the next volume of the same journal [here], where the name is attributed to "J. Verreaux et Albert Geoffroy". (Albeit, given that this work is authored by Jules Verreaux alone and that the introductory text explicitly makes him alone the author of the description, Jules Verreaux alone would probably have to be the official author of the name, should it be deemed available from there.)

The bird is sufficiently described in the 1866 announcement to make the name available. However, the wording that is used for the introduction of the name, there, makes its availability somewhat questionable: "nous proposerons ultérieurement de désigner cet oiseau sous le nom de Lophophorus Lhuysii, le dédiant à notre président" = "we will propose at a later point to denote this bird by the name Lophophorus Lhuysii, in dedication to our president". This is dangerously close to a disclaimer, with the direct implication that the name was not proposed at this point. Names that are disclaimed in a work are not available from this work.

This bird is still called Lophophorus lhuysii nowadays.
 
Last edited:
I brought up L. lhuysii because if Verreaux was the author of lhuysii in 1866 would he use drouynii in 1868 for a different genus why not use lhuysii again. But not sure who named lhuysii?
 
I brought up L. lhuysii because if Verreaux was the author of lhuysii in 1866 would he use drouynii in 1868 for a different genus why not use lhuysii again. But not sure who named lhuysii?
Verreaux 1867 attributed lhuysii in part to Albert Geoffroy; and in 1868 he attributed drouynii entirely to Milne Edwards. It seems quite possible that he coined neither himself.
 
Pengcheng Wang, Yang Liu, Yinong Liu, Yajing Chang, Nan Wang, Zhengwang Zhang. The role of niche divergence and geographic arrangement in the speciation of Eared Pheasants (Crossoptilon, Hodgson 1938). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 6 May 2017.

Abstract:

One of the most contentious theories in current ecology is the ecological niche conservatism, which is defined as conservatism among closely related species; however, the ecological niche can also be shifted, as documented in several cases. Genetic drift and ecological divergent selection may cause ecological niche divergence. The current study aims to test whether the ecological niche is conserved or divergent and to determine the main factor that drives ecological niche divergence or conservation. We analyzed the phylogenetic relationship, ecological niche model (ENM) and demographic history of Eared Pheasants in the genus Crossoptilon (Galliformes: Phasianidae) to test niche conservatism with respect to different geographically distributed patterns. The phylogenetic relationship was reconstructed using ∗BEAST with mitochondrial cytochrome b (cyt b) and 44 unlinked autosomal exonic loci, and ENMs were reconstructed in MAXENT using an average of 41 occurrence sites in each species and 22 bioclimatic variables. A background similarity test was used to detect whether the ecological niche is conserved. Demographic history was estimated using the isolation with migration (IM) model. We found that there was asymmetric gene flow between the allopatric sister species Crossoptilon mantchuricum and C. auritum and the parapatric sister species C. harmani and C. crossoptilon. We found that ecological niches were divergent, not conserved, between C. mantchuricum and C. auritum, which began to diverge at approximately 0.3 million years ago. However, the ecological niches were conserved between C. crossoptilon and C. harmani, which gradually diverged approximately half a million years ago. Ecological niches can be either conserved or divergent, and ecological divergent selection for local adaptation is probably an important factor that promotes and maintains niche divergence in the face of gene flow. This study provides a better understanding of the role that divergent selection has in the initial speciation process. The platform combined demographic processes and ecological niches to offer new insights into the mechanism of biogeography patterns.
 
Pengcheng Wang, Hongyan Yao, Kadeem J. Gilbert, Qi Lu, Yu Hao, Zhengwang Zhang, Nan Wang. Glaciation-based isolation contributed to speciation in a Palearctic alpine biodiversity hotspot: evidence from endemic species. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. Available online 12 September 2018, In Press, Accepted Manuscript.

Abstract:

Organisms are unevenly distributed on earth and the evolutionary drivers of that have puzzled ecologists and evolutionary biologists for over a century. Even though many studies have focused on the mechanisms of unevenly distributed fauna and flora, there remains much to learn about the evolutionary drivers behind biodiversity hotspots. In the Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountains, a biodiversity hotspot in the Palearctic realm, alpine uplift cannot be the driver for recent speciation (< two million years ago), researchers broadly refer to climatic oscillations driven biodiversity, however, the specific individual roles of glaciation and inter-glaciation periods in promoting biodiversity is unclear. The current study focuses on investigating whether recent speciation between two close-related avian species (White eared pheasant, Crossoptilon crossoptilon and Tibetan eared pheasant, C. harmani) was driven by glaciation-based isolation or by dispersal during inter-glaciation. To answer this question, we combined Sanger sequencing and next-generation sequencing technology to estimate population structure, phylogeny, divergence time, demographic history and potential historical distributions for C. crossoptilon and C. harmani, which are endemic to China. We found that the divergence time between these two species and within C. crossoptilon are both during glaciation periods. During glaciation periods, both C. harmani and C. crossoptilon experienced isolated distributions and extreme bottlenecks. The results of this study suggest that glaciation-based isolation contributed to recent speciation in the Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountains, and sheds light on our understanding of the evolutionary mechanisms that contributed to the formation of Palearctic alpine biodiversity hotspots and unevenly distributed species richness pattern.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top