• 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.

Accipiters (1 Viewer)

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Van Houdt, Sonet, Breman & Louette 2009. DNA barcoding of European Accipiter and their African relatives. 7th EOU Conference, Zurich.
http://www.eou.at/EOU_Zurich_Abstracts.pdf [p144]

Suggests:

  • splitting A atricapillus from A gentilis
  • splitting A erythronemius from A striatus [as IOC, HBW]
  • lumping A rufiventris with A nisus
  • splitting A sphenurus & A polyzonoides from A badius
Richard
 
hhhmm...I wonder how much anyone takes seriously DNA barcoding for lumping. Didn't previous results suggest lumping of 9 species of white-headed gulls, including some very very good species?

Strikes me that bar code based lumping merely suggests a divergence not old enough to detect in the method, not necessarily evidence that two species are not "distinct" enough to warrant lumping
 
Strikes me that bar code based lumping merely suggests a divergence not old enough to detect in the method, not necessarily evidence that two species are not "distinct" enough to warrant lumping
Yes. I seem to recall that although earlier barcoding studies claimed to have identified potential splits or lumps, more recently they've tended to refrain from making specific proposals (instead just highlighting cases that may warrant further investigation).

Richard
 
Last edited:
Madagascar Sparrowhawk

any mention of A. madagascarensis will that be lumped with nisus too?
This was just a poster presentation – I've seen no more than the abstract (given in the link in post #1), which doesn't mention A madagascariensis.

Richard
 
Breman, F. C., Sonet, G., Nagy, Z. T., Jordaens, K., Louette, M. 2011. DNA barcoding of European and African Accipiter (ACCIPITRIDAE: FALCONIFORMES). Fourth International Barcode of Life Conference.
Presentation pdf
 
Breman et al

Breman, Jordaens, Sonet, Nagy, Van Houdt & Louette (in press). DNA barcoding and evolutionary relationships in Accipiter Brisson, 1760 (Aves, Falconiformes: Accipitridae) with a focus on African and Eurasian representatives. J Ornithol. [abstract]

Possible splits (Breman et al don't suggest English names):
  • Accipiter (tachiro) unduliventer - (Abyssinian Goshawk)
  • Accipiter (gentilis) atricapillus - (American Goshawk
  • Accipiter (badius) polyzonoides - (Southern Shikra / Southern Little Banded Goshawk?)
  • Accipiter (badius) sphenurus - (Eritrean Shikra / Northern Little Banded Goshawk?)
  • Accipiter (striatus) erythronemius - (Rufous-thighed Hawk) [HBW, IOC]
Possible lump:
  • Accipiter (nisus) rufiventris - (Rufous-breasted Sparrowhawk)
 
Last edited:
Possible splits:
  • Accipiter (badius) polyzonoides - (Southern Shikra)
  • Accipiter (badius) sphenurus - (Eritrean Shikra)

Ho, God...if the split is confirmed, identifying 'Shikra' in Kenya/Tanzania (where apparently, they 'drew the line' that separates Eritrean from Southern) promises to be an interesting birding experience...:D

But where does that leave 'Asian' Shikra? From photos, I have always thought they looked different to African birds. Already split perhaps?
 
I seem to remember that the British Goshawk population is thought to derive essentially from austringers' birds, of multiple origins. Is there any analysis of the genetics of British Goshawks? Are they a melange of European and American birds? If so, presumably that would cast considerable doubt on the split?

Also, what happens around/across the Bering Strait? Is this a ring species rather than two?

John
 
Northern Goshawk

I seem to remember that the British Goshawk population is thought to derive essentially from austringers' birds, of multiple origins. Is there any analysis of the genetics of British Goshawks? Are they a melange of European and American birds?
The A gentilis specimens used were from Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Italy, China, S Korea and N America (including Canada).

There's no analysis of British birds, but Parkin & Knox 2010 (The Status of Birds in Britain & Ireland) notes that the British population derived from falconers' birds is believed to mostly comprise nominate gentilis from Fennoscandia and C Europe. Also, Dudley 2005 (Changes to Category C of the British List): "The British population consists of the race gentilis imported from central Europe and Scandinavia."
 
Last edited:
The A gentilis specimens used were from Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Italy, China, S Korea and N America (including Canada).

There's no analysis of British birds, but Parkin & Knox 2010 (The Status of Birds in Britain & Ireland) notes that the British population derived from falconers' birds is believed to mostly comprise nominate gentilis from Fennoscandia and C Europe. Also, Dudley 2005 (Changes to Category C of the British List): "The British population consists of the race gentilis imported from central Europe and Scandinavia."

Illuminating and actually quite reassuring that our Goshawks are basically OK. Thanks Richard.

John
 
Not sure why trivirgatus and poliogaster are retained in Accipiter...?
In Breman et al. 2012, Fig.5, the complete barcode sequence of trivirgatus clusters with the outgroup, rather than with any subgroup of Accipiter -- albeit admittedly with poor support.
GenBank has a partial cytb sequence that has a similar signal, so I combined this segment with the cox1 sequences (which produced an alignment of 1192bp in total), and analysed it together with the other accipitrids that have had these two genes sequenced. The tree is attached.

Tachyspiza Kaup, 1844 and Leucospiza Kaup, 1844 seem to have equal priority (same publication, both as subgenus), and may require a First Reviser act.

Ending issues:
  • "Tachyspiza castanilia": original spelling castanilius. From castanea (chestnut) + ilia (flank) with ending modified into -us. Ends in a Latin noun with modified ending, but no adjectical suffix; I'd treat it as a noun and retain the original ending.
  • "Tachyspiza erythropa": OS erythropus. From ἐρυθρός (red) + πούς (foot, genitive ποδός), latinized. This ends in a Latinized Greek noun, I'd retain the original ending. (Cf. Gallinula chloropus; "erythropodus" would have been adjectival.)
  • "Tachyspiza henicogrammus". From ἑνικός (single) + γραμμή (line) + variable ending -ος,-ος,-ον, latinised into -us,-a,-um; meaning "single-lined". This is what David & Gosselin call a "latinized adjective derived from Greek", I'd let the ending vary.

  • "Tachyspiza francesiae": OS francesii. Another type of problem; my reading of the 4th ed. of the Code is still that this type of correction, that was mandatory under the 3rd ed., is now forbidden. (I don't believe that francesiae is in clear prevailing usage.)
    But I know others will disagree with this.
...I also have a small lingering doubt about this one:

  • "Tachyspiza minulla": OS minullus. Jobling gives: "minula / minulla / minullum / minullus Med. L. minulus very small (dim. from L. minus less)." I'd be most interested if anybody could show me a Latin dictionary that actually includes this word--it is certainly absent from classical Latin dictionaries, but also, eg., Niermeyer's Medieval Latin-French/English Dictionary seems to ignore it. Does it really exist?
 

Attachments

  • cytb-cox1_Accipiter-trivirgatus.pdf
    8 KB · Views: 380
Warning! This thread is more than 7 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