• 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.

More Babbler shuffling! (2 Viewers)

Re. http://jboyd.net/Taxo/List23.html
"The natural name for Leiothrichidae is Garrulacidae (based on the oldest named genus). However, the ICZN insists on keeping separate books for family-level names and for genera, meaning that the oddly spelled term Leiothrichidae is correct. I do not know why the ICZN does this instead of simply extending the genus name system where the oldest-named generic type determines the genus name. It would be much simpler to also use the oldest-named genus to determine the family name. Gelang et al. might have been able to abandon Leiothrichidae due to lack of use, but they have endorsed it (as Leiothrichinae) instead."

I don't think they could have done that; at least not unless Garrulacidae had already been very extensively used, which it is not.

In terms of priority, the ICZN indeed regards family-group names as completely independent from the genus-group names on which they are based. The dates you have to consider to establish priority between family-group names are the dates of the publications that made them available as family-group names, never the dates of publication of their type-genera.
(Exactly as the dates you have to consider to establish priority between generic names are of course the dates of introduction of the generic names themselves, not those of the descriptions of their type-species.)
Of course, treating family names as "super genus-group names" would be possible, had we to construct a new system today out of nothing. But this is simply not how the system was designed from the beginning, and turning to such a method would make a huge number of family names suddenly incorrect (e.g., Carduelidae should become Loxiidae, etc...).

The most extensive work on bird family-group names to date is probably that of Bock 1994 - http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/dspace/handle/2246/830. (It is not perfect, though, and the claims it makes are probably always best double-checked.) What it suggests in the present case is:
Leiotrichidae Swainson, 1832 ("1831"), is based on Leiothrix Swainson, 1832.
Garrulacidae Bonaparte, 1850, is based on Garrulax Lesson, 1831.
If so, Leiothrichidae has priority over Garrulacidae, because it was published first. Garrulax indeed has priority over Leiothrix, but this is irrelevant.

(Re. spelling: Leiothrix derives from λειος (leios) = smooth + θριξ (thrix) = hair. Family-group names are formed from the stem of the genitive case of the genus name on which they are based. The genitive of θριξ is θριχος (thrichos), thus the stem to be used is thrich*, and Leiothrichidae is indeed correct.)

L -

Edit - Incidentally, Garrulax is not the oldest named genus of the group. Turdoides Cretzschmar, 1827, is older.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone with access to the article know if other wren-babbler genera were sampled besides Pnoepyga, or is it a guess at this stage whether the new family should include only that genus or all of the wren-babblers?
 
Has this relationship been published anywhere yet?

That's a no then!

I imagine Horizorhinus will be placed in with Sylvia on the TiF list as soon as something citable has been published.

Interesting to note that the position of Sylvia type atricapilla closer to Pseudoalcippe and Lioptilus than to the rest of the traditional Sylvias, has forced the creation of a new genus Curruca for those birds.

Incidentally I see Gelang et al are proposing the separation of the new Sylviidae from the Babblers, a move which ought to resolve the whole Timaliidae/Sylviidae nomenclature problem.
 
Does anyone have access to the full article?

By the way - is there any genetic research being done on Malia? That would be really interesting to see, and since it's a quite common species, it's a bit surprising nothing's been published, or has it?
 
Does anyone with access to the article know if other wren-babbler genera were sampled besides Pnoepyga, or is it a guess at this stage whether the new family should include only that genus or all of the wren-babblers?

In the consensus tree, Spelaeornis chocolatinus is within the Timaliinae.

Within the Pellorneinae, we have :
- Napothera epilepidota, Jabouilleia danjoui & Rimator pasquieri

- Turdinus macrodactyla (macrodactylus ?), close to Graminicola

- Kenopia striata, close to Pellorneum
 
Does anyone have access to the full article?

By the way - is there any genetic research being done on Malia? That would be really interesting to see, and since it's a quite common species, it's a bit surprising nothing's been published, or has it?


I have a copy thanks to Daniel Philippe. If you still require it email me for a pdf.

Since Zosteropidae is a well established family of ~ 100 species which was only recently augmented with ~ 20 small babblers, I'm not sure why the authors propose family status for Sylviidae and Timaliidae but subfamily status for what would appear to be a fairly well-defined group of small nectar and insect eaters (yuhinas are also nectarivores I believe). Just a little niggle! ;) In their place I would've proposed the raising of this group to family status as well.

More interesting info from the paper:

1) Kupeornis & Phyllanthus forming a well supported clade with Turdoides jardinei (the only Turdoides sampled).

2) Position of Paradoxornis gularis closer to Chamaea than to two 'Suthora'-type Parrotbill species (P. nipalensis & verreauxi) rendering the genus Paradoxornis paraphyletic. Would appear to lend support to work in progress by Yeung revealing deep divergences within Paradoxornis between large species and 'Suthora' types.

3) Thamnornis chloropetoides in a well-supported clade consisting of Donacobius atricapillus and Megalurus palustris. I don't recall seeing this species appearing in any previous study. Hints at interesting Megalurid relationships. The whole Megalurus/Bradypterus/Locustella thing badly needs investigated anyway.
 
Last edited:
Had a look at the Pnoepyga wren-babblers in HBW12. What fantastic little birds!
Since there will still be birds called wren-babblers in the Timaliidae perhaps we should for a bit of fun, come up with a different English group name for the members of this new family - but definitely not Pnoepygas :eek!:

From Gelang (et al)'s family diagnosis - how about Cupwings? :king:
 
Last edited:
A number of reassignments from Timaliidae have now been proposed in IOC World Bird List V2.6 Draft, including recognition of Pnoepygidae as proposed by Gelang et al 2009.
http://www.worldbirdnames.org/updates-tax.html

Richard

:t: In general, the draft version of IOC V2.6 indicates uncommon taxonomic progress. Till now 1 new order (Suliformes), 4 new families (Capitonidae, Semnornithidae, Pnoepygidae, Macrosphenidae) and other numerous changes.
 
any idea when they might finalize revisions and incorporate their proposed changes to Timaliidae (i.e. whether Zosteropidae and other families would be split out of them)?
 
any idea when they might finalize revisions and incorporate their proposed changes to Timaliidae (i.e. whether Zosteropidae and other families would be split out of them)?
Presumably it's still a work in progress.

Either Zosteropidae could be subsumed in Timaliidae; or Yuhina etc transferred to Zosteropidae, and Pellorneidae & Leiothrichidae recognised as additional families.

The August 2009 working draft explored the options:
www.worldbirdnames.org/updates.html [V2.2, Classification, Babblers]
www.worldbirdnames.org/updates-babblers1.html
www.worldbirdnames.org/updates-babblers2.html

Richard
 
true although I believe I have pointed out before you could recognize Zosteropidae without recognizing the other two
 
Tianlong Cai, Alice Cibois, Per Alström, Robert G. Moyle, Jonathan D. Kennedy, Shimiao Shao, Ruiying Zhang, Martin Irestedt, Per G.P. Ericson, Magnus Gelang, Yanhua Qu, Fumin Lei, Jon Fjeldså. Near-complete phylogeny and taxonomic revision of the world’s babbler (Aves: Passeriformes). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 12 October 2018.

Abstract:

The babblers are a diverse group of passerine birds comprising 452 species. The group was long regarded as a “scrap basket” in taxonomic classification schemes. Although several studies have assessed the phylogenetic relationships for subsets of babblers during the past two decades, a comprehensive phylogeny of this group has been lacking. In this study, we used five mitochondrial and seven nuclear loci to generate a dated phylogeny for babblers. This phylogeny includes 402 species (ca. 89% of the overall clade) from 75 genera (97%) and all five currently recognized families, providing a robust basis for taxonomic revision. Our phylogeny supports seven major clades and reveals several non-monophyletic genera. Divergence time estimates indicate that the seven major clades diverged around the same time (18–20 million years ago, Ma) in the early Miocene. We use the phylogeny in a consistent way to propose a new taxonomy, with seven families and 64 genera of babblers, and a new linear sequence of names.
 
Tianlong Cai, Alice Cibois, Per Alström, Robert G. Moyle, Jonathan D. Kennedy, Shimiao Shao, Ruiying Zhang, Martin Irestedt, Per G.P. Ericson, Magnus Gelang, Yanhua Qu, Fumin Lei, Jon Fjeldså. Near-complete phylogeny and taxonomic revision of the world’s babbler (Aves: Passeriformes). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 12 October 2018.

Abstract:

The babblers are a diverse group of passerine birds comprising 452 species. The group was long regarded as a “scrap basket” in taxonomic classification schemes. Although several studies have assessed the phylogenetic relationships for subsets of babblers during the past two decades, a comprehensive phylogeny of this group has been lacking. In this study, we used five mitochondrial and seven nuclear loci to generate a dated phylogeny for babblers. This phylogeny includes 402 species (ca. 89% of the overall clade) from 75 genera (97%) and all five currently recognized families, providing a robust basis for taxonomic revision. Our phylogeny supports seven major clades and reveals several non-monophyletic genera. Divergence time estimates indicate that the seven major clades diverged around the same time (18–20 million years ago, Ma) in the early Miocene. We use the phylogeny in a consistent way to propose a new taxonomy, with seven families and 64 genera of babblers, and a new linear sequence of names.

Families:

Sylviidae
Paradoxornithidae
Zosteropidae (incl. Parayuhina gen. nov.)
Timaliidae
Pellorneidae
Alcippeidae fam. nov.
Leiothrichidae
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top