• 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.

True francolins & spurfowls (1 Viewer)

Mandiwana-Neudani T.G., Little R.M., Crowe T.M. & Bowie R.C.K., 2018. Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls (Galliformes, Phasianidae, Coturnicinae, Pternistis spp.). bioRxiv
 
Elgon Francolin Scleroptila elgonensis should be treated as a species distinct from Moorland Francolin S. psilolaema.

Moorland Francolin Scleroptila psilolaema is generally considered to comprise four subspecies in the highlands of Ethiopia, Kenya and eastern Uganda. This treatment is based on the shared habitat preferences (Afro-al
pine moorland) and supposedly similar plumage characteristics of the four taxa, although prior to 1963 they were not treated as conspecific. To determine whether this approach is strongly supported, we examined vocal and morphological evidence, and reviewed the available genetic data. The vocal data in particular displayed qualitative differences, with vocalisations of Elgon Francolin being more similar to those of Shelley’s Francolin S. shelleyi and Archer’s (Orange River) Francolin S. gutturalis than those of Moorland Francolin. We conclude that Ethiopian birds (‘Moorland Francolin’ S. psilolaema) and Kenyan / Ugandan birds (‘Elgon Francolin’ S. elgonensis) should be treated as separate species.
https://www.africanbirdclub.org/bul...olin-scleroptila-elgonensis-should-be-treated
 
Pternistis

Mandiwana-Neudani T.G., Little R.M., Crowe T.M. & Bowie R.C.K., 2018. Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls (Galliformes, Phasianidae, Coturnicinae, Pternistis spp.). bioRxiv

Tshifhiwa G Mandiwana-Neudani, Robin M Little, Timothy M Crowe & Rauri CK Bowie (2019) Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Coturnicini: Pternistis spp., Ostrich, 90:2, 145-172, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2019.1584925

Abstract:

Afro-Asiatic perdicine galliform birds, commonly and inconsistently referred to as francolins, spurfowls and partridges, have contentious taxonomic and phylogenetic histories. In a widely followed monograph, Hall combined two putative monophyletic, but taxonomically unnamed, clades comprising 28 perdicine species known as ‘francolins’ or fisante in South Africa and 13 additional quail-like species (partridges or patryse) into a single genus, Francolinus, which was the largest genus within the Galliformes. Furthermore, she partitioned fisante + patryse into eight, also formally unnamed, putative monophyletic ‘Groups’ and speculated on the phylogenetic affinities of four ‘Unplaced’ species. We investigate fisante using combined morphological, vocalisation and DNA-based evidence and produce a comprehensive revision of fisante taxonomy and phylogeny, a stable classification system and common terminology, and hypotheses vis-à-vis eco-biogeographical processes that promoted their speciation and cladogenesis. Three of Hall’s four Groups of fisante sensu stricto (Montane, Scaly and Vermiculated) are para- or polyphyletic evolutionary grades. Only her Bare-throated Group emerges as monophyletic. We recommend the recognition of only one genus, Pternistis, and the use of ‘spurfowl’ as its collective common name. The proposed new system recognises 25 species, elevating two of Hall’s subspecies (schuetti and cranchii) to species level and reduces the number of subspecies taxa from 59 to 16. Several species pairs of spurfowls, most notably P. afer and P. cranchii, hybridise in para/sympatry. At least one Bare-throated spurfowl, P. rufopictus, may be the product of stabilised hybridisation between P. afer and/or P. cranchii and P. leucoscepus, and hybridisation between proto-taxa in the Montane and Scaly grades may undermine nodal support for basal spurfowl clades.
 
Anyone know why eBird/Clements treats Scaly Francolin (Spurfowl) as monotypic?


Clements treated Scaly Francolin as monotypic from the first edition in which subspecies were included (5th edition, 2000). that dates from before my time, but probably was following Crowe, Keith, and Brown in Birds of Africa volume II (1986: 45):

"Exhibits considerable individual variation and small clinal variation, with western birds being much more mottled and and blotched with buff and rufous dorsally, and paler overall ventrally than eastern ones. Extremes in variation illustrated in Plate 3 with western 'squamatus' on the right and eastern 'usambarae' on the left. We do not recognize these clinal extremes as valid subspecies".
 
I'm getting confused (nothing new there I hear you say), are we talking about Pternistis afer cranchii Cranch's not 'Cranchi's'?

Edit: I found this abstract.

Tshifhiwa Mandiwana-Neudani, Rob Little, Tim Crowe and Rauri Bowie recently published a paper in the African journal of ornithology Ostrich titled ‘Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Coturnicini: Pternistis spp.’ They recommend the recognition of only one genus, Pternistis, and the use of “spurfowl” as its collective common name. Their proposed new system recognizes 25 species, elevating two of Hall’s subspecies (schuetti and cranchii) to species level and reduces the number of subspecies taxa from 59 to 16. Schuett’s Spurfowl which is separated from the Scaly Spurfowl occurs in eastern DR Congo extending east to Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Malawi. While Cranch’s Spurfowl which is separated from the Red-necked Spurfowl occurs from southern DR Congo, northern Angola, northern Zambia, western Tanzania and Uganda.

Tshifhiwa G Mandiwana-Neudani, Robin M Little, Timothy M Crowe & Rauri CK Bowie (2019) Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Coturnicini: Pternistis spp., Ostrich, 90:2, 145-172, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2019.1584925
 
Last edited:
Timothy M Crowe, Robin M Little & Donald A Turner (2019) Clarifying taxonomic, distributional and genetic information relating to subspecies of the Hildebrandt’s Spurfowl Pternistis hildebrandti and the Yellow-necked Spurfowl P. leucoscepus, Ostrich, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2019.1660431

Abstract:

We provide suggested errata vis-à-vis Mandiwana-Neudani TG, Little RM, Crowe TM, Bowie RCK. 2019. Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of African spurfowls Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Coturnicini: Pternistis spp. Ostrich 90(2): 145–172. Firstly, the name fischeri was incorrectly applied to the southern subspecies of P. hildebrandti. The correct name is johnstoni. This taxon is 3.2% (not 0.5%) genetically divergent from P. h. hildebrandti. Secondly, contra Hall [Hall BP. 1963. The francolins, a study in speciation. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Zoology) 10: 105–204], P. leucoscepus is not distributed continuously from Eritrea to Tanzania. The northern, nominate subspecies P. l. leucoscepus appears to be confined to Eritrea and north-eastern Ethiopia.
 
Afrocolinus

Tshifhiwa G Mandiwana-Neudani, Robin M Little, Timothy M Crowe & Rauri CK Bowie (2019) Taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of ‘true’ francolins: Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Gallini; Francolinus, Ortygornis, Afrocolinus gen. nov., Peliperdix and Scleroptila spp., Ostrich, 90:3, 191-221, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2019.1632954

Abstract:

Afro-Asiatic perdicine galliform taxa commonly and inconsistently referred to as francolins, spurfowls and partridges have contentious taxonomic and phylogenetic histories. Hall combined two putative monophyletic, but taxonomically unnamed, clades comprising 28 perdicine species known as ‘francolins’ or fisante in South Africa and 13 more quail-like species (partridges or patryse) into a single genus Francolinus, which was the largest galliform genus. Furthermore, she partitioned fisante + patryse into eight, also formally unnamed, putative monophyletic ‘Groups’ and speculated on the phylogenetic affinities of four ‘Unplaced’ species. We investigate patryse sensu lato using combined morphological, vocalisation and DNA evidence to produce a comprehensive revision of patryse taxonomy and phylogeny, a stable classification system and common-naming practice, and hypotheses vis-à-vis eco-biogeographical processes that promoted their speciation and cladogenesis. We confirm the monophyly of a larger patryse clade (including members of Hall’s ‘Spotted Group’ and one ‘Unplaced’ species, gularis) both from her fisante, and propose that they should be referred to commonly as ‘francolins’. We recognise five genera in the following phylogenetic sequence: Francolinus, Ortygornis, Afrocolinus gen. nov. plus Peliperdix and Scleroptila. The proposed new system recognises 31 species, elevating 14 subspecies to species level (Ortygornis grantii, O. rovuma, Peliperdix dewittei, P. hubbardi, P. thikae, P. stuhlmanni, P. maharao, P. spinetorum, Scleroptila crawshayi, S. elgonensis, S. gutturalis, S. jugularis, S. uluensis and S. whytei) and lumping other subspecies into more inclusive entities. Biogeographically, Asio-African ‘true’ francolins sensu lato appear to have originated in Asia and/or Indonesia and were derived from a forest-adapted taxon. Within Africa, an early evolutionary radiation occurred in subdeserts and arid bush versus primary forest, culminating in Ortygornis spp. and Afrocolinus lathami. Thereafter, there was more complex evolution in savannas and grasslands along rainfall and altitudinal gradients. This radiation was further driven allo-parapatrically by topography, rainfall, dynamically expanding and contracting forests and Lake Mega-Chad.
 
Since lathami is the type species of Peliperdix Bonaparte, 1856, Afrocolinus is already a junior synonym of Peliperdix

Does anyone have the final paper please ?
 
Last edited:
The authors are aware about this mistake and they will fix it.
Crowe TM, Mandiwana-Neudani TG, Donsker DB, Bowie RCK, Little RM. 2020. Resolving nomenclatural ‘confusion’ vis-à-vis Latham’s Francolin (Francolinus/Peliperdix/Afrocolinus lathami) and the ‘Red-tailed’ francolins (Francolinus/Ortygornis/Peliperdix spp.). Ostrich: in press.
https://doi.org/10.2989/00306525.2020.1723140

Abstract
We provide an addendum vis-à-vis Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a) on the taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of ‘true’ francolins: Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Gallini; Francolinus, Ortygornis, Afrocolinus gen. nov., Peliperdix and Scleroptila spp., Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019b). Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a) proposed the use of a new generic epithet, Afrocolinus, for Latham’s Francolin Francolinus lathami and restricting Peliperdix to an expanded set of Hall’s (1963) Red-tailed francolins. However, Afrocolinus cannot be used for lathami, because lathami is the type species for the genus Peliperdix (Bonaparte, 1856). We suggest a solution to resolve this nomenclatural conundrum; restrict the use of Peliperdix to lathami and move species taxa currently placed in Peliperdix into a new genus, namely Campocolinus.

Family: Phasianidae Horsfield, 1821
Subfamily: Phasianinae Horsfield, 1821
Tribe: Gallini Brehm, 1831
Genus: Campocolinus Crowe, Mandiwana-Neudani, Donsker, Bowie and Little, gen. nov.
Type species: Perdix coqui A. Smith, 1836
Etymology: Formed by two words, campo meaning savanna and colinus for ‘quail’
Gender: Masculine

Included species: Campocolinus schlegelii, C. dewittei, C. albogularis, C. spinetorum, C. maharao, C. hubbardi, C. thikae, C. stuhlmanni, C. coqui


(Note that the name is not published online in the sense of the Code, and thus not available yet. It will be available only once the paper version is published.)
 
Last edited:
Crowe TM, Mandiwana-Neudani TG, Donsker DB, Bowie RCK, Little RM. 2020. Resolving nomenclatural ‘confusion’ vis-à-vis Latham’s Francolin (Francolinus/Peliperdix/Afrocolinus lathami) and the ‘Red-tailed’ francolins (Francolinus/Ortygornis/Peliperdix spp.). Ostrich: in press.
https://doi.org/10.2989/00306525.2020.1723140

Abstract
We provide an addendum vis-à-vis Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a) on the taxonomy, phylogeny and biogeography of ‘true’ francolins: Galliformes, Phasianidae, Phasianinae, Gallini; Francolinus, Ortygornis, Afrocolinus gen. nov., Peliperdix and Scleroptila spp., Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019b). Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a) proposed the use of a new generic epithet, Afrocolinus, for Latham’s Francolin Francolinus lathami and restricting Peliperdix to an expanded set of Hall’s (1963) Red-tailed francolins. However, Afrocolinus cannot be used for lathami, because lathami is the type species for the genus Peliperdix (Bonaparte, 1856). We suggest a solution to resolve this nomenclatural conundrum; restrict the use of Peliperdix to lathami and move species taxa currently placed in Peliperdix into a new genus, namely Campocolinus.



(Note that the name is not published online in the sense of the Code, and thus not available yet. It will be available only once the paper version is published.)


Rob little sent me his manuscript last November, glad to see his name will be officially published soon.. (at least I hope because it would p*** me off that this name is not available since I added it in my list since last year)
 
Last edited:
Rob little sent me his manuscript last November, glad to see his name will be officially published soon.. (at least I hope because it would p*** me off that this name is not available since I added it in my list since last year)
The paper is OK as it is: it just needs being published on paper now.
Ostrich is still printed (I believe -- there are more and more journals that go quietly online-only these days, and it can sometimes be hard to find out...), so this should in principle not be a problem.
 
The paper is OK as it is: it just needs being published on paper now.
Ostrich is still printed (I believe -- there are more and more journals that go quietly online-only these days, and it can sometimes be hard to find out...), so this should in principle not be a problem.


All that remains to know the volume, probably the next. :D
 
Nigel Hunter, Don Turner, Nik Borrow, Brian Finch, Adam Scott Kennedy, Terry Stevenson, Neil Baker & Nigel Redman (2021) Reflections concerning spurfowl and francolin species recommendations contained in Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a and 2019b), Ostrich, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2021.1890255

Abstract:

Recently, two papers by Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a, 2019b) revisited the taxonomy of all Afrotropical spurfowl and francolins and proposed significant changes at the species level. A careful review of the papers suggests there are key deficiencies and inadequate explanations in both. These concerns include doubts about the methodology employed and the proposed taxonomic changes for some 13 species in particular. The methodology employed by the authors is a combination of an ‘organismal’ matrix consisting mainly of plumage patterning, wing/tail/soft part measurements and vocalisation indicators, all allocated a score and then combined with some DNA analysis. For the non-molecular work, there is no explanation of the scientific basis used for the scoring characteristics and the scores allocated. There is also no explanation as to why 33 features were used in the spurfowl paper and only 24 in the francolin paper, particularly where no reference has been made to the age or sex of the birds scored and compared. A concern in the DNA component is that the number of samples is far too few for justifying a significant taxonomic rearrangement covering the whole of Africa. There does not appear to be a single taxon that is represented by more than one genetic sample, which is well outside the norm for robust studies and does not allow for mistakes in the sample labelling or analysis to be detected. In addition to the above concerns, there are many factual errors in both papers pertaining to the text and distribution maps and these are detailed in the individual species’ comments. Based on this analysis, there seems to be good justification in recommending that their taxonomic results and conclusions should be treated with care and caution until additional research is undertaken.
 
Tshifhiwa G Mandiwana-Neudani, Timothy M Crowe, Robin M Little & Rauri CK Bowie (2021) The importance of adopting an integrative taxonomy framework in species delimitation: Response to Hunter et al. (2021), Ostrich, DOI: 10.2989/00306525.2021.1898170

Abstract:

The review by Hunter et al. (2021) on the delineation of certain francolin and spurfowl taxa as full species by Mandiwana-Neudani et al. (2019a, 2019b) appears to be largely orientated around their application of the Biological Species Concept (BSC). We employed an integrative taxonomy framework, evaluating morphological characters from across each species distribution range and integrate these data with analyses of vocal and molecular characters. We consider an integrative taxonomic framework, where consilience is sought among characters, as a more appropriate framework to adopt, given the limitations of the BSC and the need for a more effective way to discover fundamental units of comparative biology and conservation action. We thank the authors of Hunter et al. (2021) for their support of many aspects of our findings and for raising their concerns, which we trust that we have suitably addressed in this response.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top