• 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.

Thraupidae (1 Viewer)

Just noticed something - with Oreomanes now subsumed within Conirostrum, the Giant Conebill Conirostrum fraseri (P.L. Sclater 1860) becomes a junior homonym to Conirostrum cinereum fraseri P.L. Sclater 1859 (subspecies of Cinereous Conebill). The next oldest name available for the Giant Conebill appears to be Conrirostrum binghami (Chapman 1919) - type locality: Cedrobamba ruins, Machu Picchu, Peru.

Liam
 
Last edited:
there's no asterisk next to any node below the subfamilies (except the one subtending the whole family), so I take it to mean that none of the sister relationships between the subfamilies are strongly supported, and the authors could only minimally name 15 subfamilies.

Yes, they say:

"Our analyses revealed 13 strongly-supported nodes relatively early in the tree that define novel subgroups of tanagers (Fig. 1) that we designate as subfamilies. These clades are the deepest nodes in the tree that are supported by either PP ≥ 0.95 or bootstrap ≥ 70%. All are recovered in both Bayesian and ML topologies, and most are also strongly supported by both. In addition, all but one of these subfamilies have significant support ( ≥ 0.95 PP) in the species tree analyses of Barker et al. (2013). Only two species (Catamblyrhynchus diadema and Charitospiza eucosma) did not cluster into one of these clades. Because of the distinctiveness of these two lineages, we place each into subfamilies as well. Although we identified these 15 major groups, we did not find strong support for relationships among them (Figs. 1, 2-6)".
 
Giant Conebill

Just noticed something - with Oreomanes now subsumed within Conirostrum, the Giant Conebill Conirostrum fraseri (P.L. Sclater 1860) becomes a junior homonym to Conirostrum cinereum fraseri P.L. Sclater 1859 (subspecies of Cinereous Conebill). The next oldest name available for the Giant Conebill appears to be Conrirostrum binghami (Chapman 1919) - type locality: Cedrobamba ruins, Machu Picchu, Peru.
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html (9 Mar 2014)
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/List32.html#thraupidae
 
Mason et al 2014

Mason, Shultz & Burns 2014. Elaborate visual and acoustic signals evolve independently in a large, phenotypically diverse radiation of songbirds. Proc R Soc B 281(1788): 20140967. [abstract] [data suppl]
 
Céspedes Arias et al

Céspedes Arias, Laverde & Cadena. Avian coloration along an Andean elevation gradient: Interspecific patterns in Thraupidae. Evolution 2014. (p430)
Interspecific variation in color has been broadly studied in association with contrasting light environments and humidity gradients. However, the effect of other environmental variables and biotic conditions on the patterns of interspecific variation in coloration remains highly unexplored. Elevational gradients are useful settings to understand how environmental and biotic variables may affect the evolution of coloration in birds. Temperature, humidity, forest structure, and biotic variables such as nest predation pressure vary with elevation, but the effects of such variation on the evolution of avian coloration have not been assessed. We examined whether elevational distribution of species partially explains the interspecific variation in coloration in a speciose family of Passeriformes: Thraupidae, which is highly diverse in the Colombian Andes. We included a total of 49 species that live in three localities at different elevation in the Colombian Andean region. We used reflectance spectrometry to evaluate how plumage conspicuousness and other characteristics of the color pattern changes in relation to the elevational distribution of species. We measured museum skins and characterized foraging strata and habitat occupied by each species, and also incorporated data on the coloration of background elements (e.g., leaves, litter and wood) to fully characterize plumage conspicuosness relative to background color. Also we obtained the color volume, mean color span and mean hue disparity, for both males and females. We found, for example, that hue disparity (i.e color heterogeneity) appears to be higher in localities at higher elevation for females but not males. Our data suggest that elements of plumage coloration have likely been shaped by contrasting selective pressures along elevational gradients, however, we did not find strong evidence for the idea that such pattern is related with differences in predation pressure.
 
Last edited:
Zootaxa 3873 (4): 477–494 (20 Oct. 2014)
Morphological variation in the Cinnamon Tanager Schistochlamys ruficapillus (Aves: Thraupidae)
LEONARDO ESTEVES LOPES & LUIZ PEDREIRA GONZAGA

Abstract
The Cinnamon Tanager Schistochlamys ruficapillus inhabits semi-open grassy country, primarily in Brazil south of Amazonia.
Three subspecies are currently recognized, one of which, S. r. sicki, is poorly known and endemic to the central
Brazilian savannas (Cerrado). This paper analyses individual and geographic variation in this species on the basis of body
measurements and plumage coloration. Larger birds are usually found farther south and at higher elevations, while smaller
birds are found farther north and at lower elevations, as predicted by Bergmann’s rule. Nevertheless, some unexpectedly
small individuals (referable to S. r. sicki) can be found in central Brazil. Individual and geographical variation in plumage
coloration is substantial, but it is not closely tied to variation in body size. Therefore, given the large number of specimens
intermediate between the three subspecies, we propose to consider the Cinnamon Tanager a monotypic but highly variable
species. The recognition of three subspecies by previous taxonomists was due to small sample sizes associated with large
gaps in sampling.
 
Cinnamon Tanager

Zootaxa 3873 (4): 477–494 (20 Oct. 2014)
Morphological variation in the Cinnamon Tanager Schistochlamys ruficapillus (Aves: Thraupidae)
LEONARDO ESTEVES LOPES & LUIZ PEDREIRA GONZAGA
[preview]

Hilty 2011 (HBW 16)...
Races differ minimally: capistrata is smaller and shorter-tailed than nominate, also duller on head, much paler cinnamon on throat and breast; sicki is generally richer and slightly darker in colour tone.
 
Last edited:
Burns et al

Forthcoming...

Burns, Unitt & Mason (in review). A generic-level classification of the family Thraupidae (Class Aves: Order Passeriformes). Zootaxa.
 
Tachyphonus phoenicius

Matos, M. V., Borges, S. H., d'Horta, F. M., Cornelius, C., Latrubesse, E., Cohn-Haft, M. and Ribas, C. C. (2016), Comparative Phylogeography of Two Bird Species, Tachyphonus phoenicius (Thraupidae) and Polytmus theresiae (Trochilidae), Specialized in Amazonian White-sand Vegetation. Biotropica, 48: 110–120. doi: 10.1111/btp.12292

[Abstract]
 
Poospizinae

It seems this passed below the radar:

Raposo do Amaral F, Neves LG, Resende MFR, Mobili F, Miyaki CY, Pellegrino KCM, Biondo C. 2015. Ultraconserved elements sequencing as a low-cost source of complete mitochondrial genomes and microsatellite markers in non-model amniotes. PLoS ONE 10(9): e0138446. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138446

-----
BTW, there are issues with the name "Poospizinae".
This name cannot be attributed to Wolters 1980 (published after 1930; no "description or definition that states in words characters that are purported to differentiate the taxon": fails to satisfy Art. 13.1.1, unavailable).
The taxon was given a description by Burns et al. 2014 [pdf], but the name cannot be attributed to them either (published after 1999; name attributed to Wolters 1980, no explicit intent to establish a new nominal taxon: fails to satisfy Art. 16.1, unavailable).
Note also that, should Wolters' names be deemed available (as Bock 1994 [pdf] deemed they were, claiming that "every new name" in Art. 13.1 was not meant to encompass family-group names), Nephelornithidae Wolters 1980 would have automatic precedence over Poospizinae Wolters 1980 for this group, because it was proposed in the same part of the same work (that is, on the same date) but at a higher rank (family vs. subfamily; unfortunately Bock 1994 seemingly did not find it useful to provide original ranks; see Art. 24.1; ToC of Wolters' Die Vogelarten der Erde [here]).
It's not fully impossible that the name might be deemed available from some grey literature work (something like [this]), that would happen to have included a diagnosis of the group before 2000 (so that it didn't need an explicit statement of intent to establish a new nominal taxon); but if so, I haven't found where yet. (Should anybody have a book that fits that description on his shelves, I'd be more than interested in the reference. ;))
 
Last edited:
Nephelornithidae Wolters and Poospizinae Wolters must have the same status.

If you apply the Code down to the word, "every new name" published after 1930 requires a description, unless it is a "new replacement name". Neither Nephelornithidae nor Poospizinae is described by Wolters and they are certainly not "new replacement names", hence they are both nomina nuda in this work. If so, if they are to be used, another source must be found that would satisfy all the requirements of the Code.

Bock 1994 did not see it this way, however. Bock wrote (p.98):
This requirement [Art. 13] of the Code is absolutely essential for species-group names and presumably also for generic-group names, and its inclusion in the Code was definitely intended for these names. Its application to family-group names is excessive, because the proposal of a new family-level taxon and its associated name is totally unambiguous if that name is firmly affixed to a type genus. Moreover, this requirement for availability as stated in the new Code (ICZN, 1961) was applied retroactively to family-group names proposed between 1930 and 1960; the provision in the Règles [Art. 25(c)] applied specifically to generic and specific names. Almost all new avian family-level names published after 1930 were not accompanied by the required description of the characteristics of the new taxon. This includes almost all names published after 1930 which are currently widely accepted and used by avian taxonomists. Most likely the same situation exists for other groups of animals. Because it is clear to which taxon a new family-group name applies if the type genus is given or is clearly implied, avian family-group names proposed after 1930 will be accepted even if they do not comply with the requirements of Article 13. To do otherwise would cause great chaos and the need to propose anew most of these recent names. An application will be made to the ICZN to modify Article 13 to exclude family-group names from its provisions.
Under Bock's rules, Nephelornithidae Wolters and Poospizinae Wolters are both available, because they are based on a type genus that is clearly identifiable. (If so, if it has the same date of publication, Nephelornithidae has automatic precedence over Poospizinae.)

However, a new edition of the Code was produced since the publication of Bock's work, and Art. 13.1 still says "every new name", without excluding the family group... And a significant proportion of the family-group names proposed over that last 20 years have indeed been names that had been proposed before, for taxa that were not described, and were being proposed anew ("formally"). IOW, at least a part of the taxonomists have apparently accepted Bock's "great chaos" and are dealing with it.

(OTOH, note that even those who insist on the requirement usually exempt family-group names that were explicitly proposed to "replace" another family-group name due to the synonymization of its type genus. This is arguably completely illogical. The nominal type genus of these names is never, by definition, the same as that of the name they "replaced". [Or should it be "displaced"?] The Code defines a "new replacement name" as having the same type as the name it replaced: these names cannot be "new replacement names". [If one insists that they are, they must be based on the nominal type genus of the name they replaced, which was treated as invalid in the publication that introduced them; as a consequence, these names fail to satisfy Art. 11.7.1.1 and are -- all -- unavailable...] I see no support in the Code to exempt these names from the requirement of a description any more than any other.)
 
Last edited:
Burns et al 2016

Forthcoming...
Burns, Unitt & Mason (in review). A generic-level classification of the family Thraupidae (Class Aves: Order Passeriformes). Zootaxa.
Burns, Unitt & Mason 2016. A genus-level classification of the family Thraupidae (Class Aves: Order Passeriformes). Zootaxa 4088(3): 329–354. [abstract]
... Here, we present two alternative classifications based on a newly published comprehensive phylogeny of tanagers. One of these classifications uses existing generic names, but defines them broadly. The other, which we advocate and follow here, provides new generic names for more narrowly defined groups. Under the latter, we propose eleven new genera (Asemospiza, Islerothraupis, Maschalethraupis, Chrysocorypha, Kleinothraupis, Castanozoster, Ephippiospingus, Chionodacryon, Pseudosaltator, Poecilostreptus, Stilpnia), and resurrect several generic names to form monophyletic taxa. ...
 
Last edited:
(These are just my guesses [I have no access to the paper], hence apologies if any of them is incorrect.)
  • Asemospiza - ἄσημος, unmarked + σπίζα, a finch (feminine)
  • Islerothraupis - Morton L. & Phyllis R. Isler (born 1929 & 1931) + θραυπίς, a small bird (feminine)
  • Maschalethraupis - μασχάλη, the arm-pit + θραυπίς, a small bird (feminine)
  • Chrysocorypha - χρυσός, gold + κορυφά/κορυφή, the crown (feminine)
  • Kleinothraupis - Nedra Kathryn Klein (1951–2001) + θραυπίς, a small bird (feminine)
  • Castanozoster - κάστανον, a chestnut + ζωστήρ, a belt or girdle (masculine)
  • Ephippiospingus - ἐφίππιος, a saddle + σπίγγος, a finch (masculine)
  • Chionodacryon - χιών, the snow + δάκρυον, a tear (neuter)
  • Pseudosaltator - pseudo-, false + Saltator Vieillot 1816 (the genus, = a dancer) (masculine)
  • Poecilostreptus - ποικίλος, variegated + στρεπτός, a collar of twisted or linked metal (masculine)
  • Stilpnia - στιλπνός, glittering + -ία, suffix forming feminine nouns from adjectives (feminine)
None seem preoccupied.
 
Last edited:
I've my own idea for 3 genera.

Pseudosaltator for "Saltator" rufiventer, Castanozoster for "Poospiza" thoracica and Chrysocorypha for "Sicalis" citrina.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top