• 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.

Potential WP splits (1 Viewer)

Richard Klim

-------------------------
Potential WP splits?

Callahan 2010. Taxonomy: Ticks in waiting. Birdwatch 216: 35-37.

Following his recent review of potential splits of Nearctic vagrants to Britain (Birdwatch 214, http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=165847), David Callahan outlines possible future splits of Western Palearctic landbird species in Macaronesia and the Mediterranean region.

Richard
 
Last edited:
The article speculates that the following taxa could be possible future split candidates [scientific names assumed, authorities already recognising indicated]:
  • Alectoris (graeca) whitakeri [DB]
  • Milvus (migrans) aegyptius [DB, OSME]
  • Buteo (rufinus) cirtensis
  • Otus (scops) cyprius
  • Strix (aluco) mauritanica
  • Merops (orientalis) cyanophrys
  • Merops (orientalis) viridissimus
  • Picus (viridis) sharpei [DB]
  • Dendrocopos (major) numidus
  • Dendrocopos (major) canariensis
  • Dendrocopos (leucotos) lilfordi
  • Picoides (tridactylus) alpinus
  • Lanius (senator) badius
  • Pica (pica) mauritanica [DB]
  • Corvus (corax) tingitanus
  • Cyanistes (teneriffae) hedwigii [DB]
  • Cyanistes (teneriffae) palmensis [DB]
  • Cyanistes (teneriffae) ombriosus [DB]
  • Cyanistes (teneriffae) ultramarinus [DB]
  • Cyanistes (teneriffae) 'degener'
  • Chersophilus (duponti) margaritae
  • Galerida (cristata) macrorhyncha [IOC, DB, OSME]
  • Eremophila (alpestris) atlas
  • Hirundo (rustica) savignii
  • Acrocephalus (scirpaceus) ssp (= Morocco)
  • Sylvia (cantillans) moltonii [IOC, DB]
  • Sylvia (cantillans) albistriata
  • Regulus (regulus) teneriffae [Clements, DB]
  • Certhia (brachydactyla) mauritanica
  • Turdus (merula) mauritanicus
  • Erithacus (rubecula) superbus [DB]
  • Erithacus (rubecula) 'marionae'
  • Ficedula (hypoleuca) iberiae
  • Cinclus (cinclus) minor
  • Passer (simplex) zarudnyi [DB]
  • Petronia (petronia) barbara
  • Motacilla (flava) flavissima [DB]
  • Motacilla (flava) thunbergi [DB]
  • Motacilla (flava) cinereocapilla [DB]
  • Motacilla (flava) feldegg [DB]
  • Motacilla (flava) tschutschensis [IOC, Clements, AOU, DB, OSME]
  • Fringilla (coelebs) moreletti
  • Fringilla (coelebs) canariensis
  • Fringilla (coelebs) ssp (= Gran Canaria)
  • Fringilla (coelebs) africana
  • Fringilla (coelebs) spodiogenys
  • Loxia (curvirostra) poliogyna
  • Rhodopechys (sanguineus) alienus [IOC, DB]
  • Emberiza (schoeniclus) pyrrhuloides
References are posted on the Birdwatch website:
http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/categories/articleitem.asp?item=587

Richard
 
Last edited:
As I've only glanced at the article (I'll be reading it later in the week when off on holiday) I'm grateful to you, Richard, for posting the list here. Most birds listed were pretty much predictable, but I found some interesting candidates I'd come across before (Otus [scops] cyprius for example). It was interesting too to read a little more about the degree to which Sicilian Rock Partridge differs from those elsewhere (it'd be hard to squeeze that split into a future edition of Collins!) .

Personally, I was most interested (although not at all surprised) to see North African Long-legged Buzzard amongst the candidates. I've never quite understood why this bird is considered a 'subspecies' Long-legged (plumage?) rather than Common Buzzard (structure?) or indeed a distinct species. Is it a matter of tradition or is there some well grounded scientific basis in the conventional view?
 
Moroccan Blackbird & Rock Sparrow

  • Turdus (merula) mauritanicus
  • Petronia (petronia) barbara
Would they both be monotypic ?
Presumably. The article just mentions that "The Moroccan forms of Blackbird and Rock Sparrow" are of taxonomic interest in this context, and as far as I'm aware mauritanicus (incl 'algirus') and barbara are the only widely-recognised sspp restricted to the Maghreb in each case.

Richard
 
Last edited:
Long-legged Buzzard

Personally, I was most interested (although not at all surprised) to see North African Long-legged Buzzard amongst the candidates. I've never quite understood why this bird is considered a 'subspecies' Long-legged (plumage?) rather than Common Buzzard (structure?) or indeed a distinct species. Is it a matter of tradition or is there some well grounded scientific basis in the conventional view?
John Boyd (TiF) comments:

Richard
 
Last edited:
If you look into plumage and morphological treats, you would never think cirtensis has nothing to do with rufinus but some similarities... however, there are many plumages that indeed are much closer to Common Buzzard.... I'm studing the ID since long time and now I'm almost ready for a major extensive paper on cirtensis...it seems to be like a mix between buteo and rufinus.
However, DNA study by the austrina team (Gamauf, Martin J Riesing et al.) seems to have find no genetyic divergence between cirtensis and rufinus...that's why they are still same species!! However, I think many more samples should be analised, and some surprise may come then....
 
Corvus corax tingitanus

The article speculates that the following taxa could be possible future split candidates [scientific names assumed, authorities already recognising indicated]:

  • ...
  • Corvus (corax) tingitanus
    ...
Here about Corvus c. tingitanus Baker & Omland, 2006. Canary Island Ravens Corvus corax tingitanus have distinct mtDNA. Ibis 148, 174–178
 
North African Raven

Here about Corvus c. tingitanus Baker & Omland, 2006. Canary Island Ravens Corvus corax tingitanus have distinct mtDNA. Ibis 148, 174–178
Actually this nomenclature can be potentially confusing. Baker & Omland 2006 refers to Canary Island Raven as Corvus corax tingitanus (following Madge & Burn 1994). But most recent literature (HBW14, H&M3, AERC, BWP) recognises the CI birds as ssp canariensis (Hartert & Kleinschmidt 1901), with tingitanus applying only to mainland North African populations.

Richard
 
I'd have thought the Cape Verdean taxa would have been in there.
Ardea ( purpurea ) bournei - very distinctive when compared to the birds in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Falco ( tinnunculus ) neglectus / F. ( t. ) alexanderi - as far as I know they are only considered part of tinnunculus by convention. I don't know of any genetic work that's been done on these two very distinctive taxa.

Others that could well be considered are -
Platalea ( leucorodia ) balsaci
Larus ( fuscus ) graellsii
Cyanopica ( cyana ) cookii
Oenanthe ( oenanthe ) seebohmi

and, possibly, Twite?
Chris
 
I'd have thought the Cape Verdean taxa would have been in there.
Ardea ( purpurea ) bournei - very distinctive when compared to the birds in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Falco ( tinnunculus ) neglectus / F. ( t. ) alexanderi - as far as I know they are only considered part of tinnunculus by convention. I don't know of any genetic work that's been done on these two very distinctive taxa.

Others that could well be considered are -
Platalea ( leucorodia ) balsaci
Larus ( fuscus ) graellsii
Cyanopica ( cyana ) cookii
Oenanthe ( oenanthe ) seebohmi

and, possibly, Twite?
Chris
Concerning Cape Verde taxa (eg, split under PSC by Hazevoet 1995) - in the article David Callahan comments:
  • "The Cape Verde Islands have had many endemic forms named over the years. Most of these, however, are clearly related to European counterparts, resulting in a history of re-lumping and re-splitting. Therefore, these forms are unlikely to provide a surprise list addition on current knowledge, and any 'countable' birds will merely involve the resurrection of a former status."
Ardea bournei, Falco alexandri, F neglectus (and other CV taxa), Cyanopica cooki and Oenanthe seebohmi are recognised by Dutch Birding.
[Cyanopica cooki is also recognised by IOC and HBW.]

The BLI Taxonomic Working Group recently considered Larus (fuscus) graellsii, but concluded that it should not be recognised as a species.

It will be interesting to see the treatment of Twite in HBW15.

Richard
 
Last edited:
Twites

[QUOTEIt will be interesting to see the treatment of Twite in HBW15.
Richard[/QUOTE]


Shoot, I've a manuscript "decaying" in a metaphorical draw on Carduelis flavirostris based on an analysis of more than 600 specimens in Tring, Manchester, Leiden, St. Petersburg, Washington and Chicago. Many names are surely doubtful, and it would also be a brave man (or woman) who tried to split any forms as separate species, despite current interest in "Caucasian Twite", or whatever people like to call C. f. brevirostris. I must resuscitate that paper, although who would publish a manuscript that advocates splitting nothing and just chucking a few old names into synonymy?
 
Twite

Many names are surely doubtful, and it would also be a brave man (or woman) who tried to split any forms as separate species, despite current interest in "Caucasian Twite", or whatever people like to call C. f. brevirostris.
So no mileage even in a split of C brevirostris (but including all Asian sspp) from the allopatric NW European population?

Richard
 
So no mileage even in a split of C brevirostris (but including all Asian sspp) from the allopatric NW European population?

Richard


Building a robust case would, I think, be fraught with difficulty, although doubtless that won't quieten some keen WP lister-types. Still, I should breath some life into that ms and see if I can't find a home for it...
 
Twites

So no mileage even in a split of C brevirostris (but including all Asian sspp) from the allopatric NW European population?
- Marthinsen et al. 2008 found a significant genetic divergence in the control region between nominate flavirostris from Europe and rufostrigata from Tibet.
- BOLD has COI sequences of several birds from Tuva, Central Asian Russia (Kerr et al. 2009), and from Scandinavia (Johnsen et al. 2010).
Although the two populations may differ (no shared haplotypes; reconstructed as reciprocally monophyletic in NJ, but not in ML), the distance between them is in any case small (well below 1%).
- Qu et al. 2009 found a significant genetic divergence between two birds from Xinjiang, and several birds from the E and W Qinghai and S Gansu, using partial COI, partial control region and partial cyt-b sequences.
Their COI sequences from Xinjiang are near-identical to the BOLD sequences from Tuva (and, therefore, also close to those of Scandinavia); their sequences from Qinghai/Gansu are some 2% away.
The control region fragment they sequenced is a bit short to be fully positive, but the CR haplotype they found in Xinjiang differs by a single substitution from the homologous part of the CR sequences of European flavirostris of Marthinsen et al., while the haplotypes they found in Qinghai/Gansu are more similar to the sequences of rufostrigata obtained by these authors.

IOW, despite the distributional gap, I can find no molecular suggestion of a particularly deep phylogenetic/phylogeographic break between NW Europe and the rest of the world. Instead, the main break seems to be right in the middle of the Asian range of the species...
 
- Marthinsen et al. 2008 found a significant genetic divergence in the control region between nominate flavirostris from Europe and rufostrigata from Tibet.
- BOLD has COI sequences of several birds from Tuva, Central Asian Russia (Kerr et al. 2009), and from Scandinavia (Johnsen et al. 2010).
Although the two populations may differ (no shared haplotypes; reconstructed as reciprocally monophyletic in NJ, but not in ML), the distance between them is in any case small (well below 1%).
- Qu et al. 2009 found a significant genetic divergence between two birds from Xinjiang, and several birds from the E and W Qinghai and S Gansu, using partial COI, partial control region and partial cyt-b sequences.
Their COI sequences from Xinjiang are near-identical to the BOLD sequences from Tuva (and, therefore, also close to those of Scandinavia); their sequences from Qinghai/Gansu are some 2% away.
The control region fragment they sequenced is a bit short to be fully positive, but the CR haplotype they found in Xinjiang differs by a single substitution from the homologous part of the CR sequences of European flavirostris of Marthinsen et al., while the haplotypes they found in Qinghai/Gansu are more similar to the sequences of rufostrigata obtained by these authors.

IOW, despite the distributional gap, I can find no molecular suggestion of a particularly deep phylogenetic/phylogeographic break between NW Europe and the rest of the world. Instead, the main break seems to be right in the middle of the Asian range of the species...



Interesting, I wasn't aware of all of these references; thanks for drawing my attention to them. I can't access the full text to these papers here, but should be able to do so from my computer in Brazil in a few days (where I can use my academic institution password). I assume that one is able to ascertain that these researchers definitely sampled summer (i.e. breeding) populations. There is likely to be substantial "mixing" between Central Asian populations (subspecies) at other seasons. I suspect that it will still be difficult to match the genetic break to any other characters (morphological or otherwise), to produce a robust integrative taxonomy.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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