• 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.

Meliphagidae (1 Viewer)

Microptilotis imitatrix

martin_WA said:
IOC post proposed split of 'Quiet Honeyeater'

https://www.worldbirdnames.org/updates/proposed-splits/

PS 10.1 Quiet? Honeyeater Meliphaga imitatrix Graceful Honeyeater M. gracilis Proposed (10.2) split of allopatric imitatrix based on vocal repertoire differences and playback responses supplemented by genetic and morphology differences incl eye color)(Nielsen 2018). ENG?

Nielson 2018 is in Australian Field Ornithology, 35: 149-157

http://www.birdlife.org.au/afo/index.php/afo/article/view/2132/2155



Also see genetic data in Penalba et al 2017

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jbi.13048
Click to expand...

IOC Updates Diary Jan 7

Accept proposed split of Cryptic Honeyeater
 
Birdllife/HBW have also accepted this split in v4, as 'Imitatress Honeyeater'.

Microptilotis gracilis has been split as Graceful Honeyeater M. gracilis and Imitatress Honeyeater M. imitatrix after a scrupulous comparison by Nielsen (2018), which found that M. imitatrix differs by its; less circular, more wedge-shaped 'ear-spot' (1); navy blue vs dark brown iris (2); greyish-olive vs off-white belly and undertail-coverts (2); usually paler yellow gape (ns); hugely restricted vocal repertoire ('only two simple vocalisations and possibly no song') vs a 'remarkable repertoire of complex vocalisations, all of which can be heard throughout its range' (at least 3).Previously M. gracilis and M. cinereifrons (del Hoyo and Collar 2016) were lumped as Meliphaga gracilis following Christidis and Boles (2008); Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).
Click to expand...
 
martin_WA said:
Birdllife/HBW have also accepted this split in v4, as 'Imitatress Honeyeater'.
Click to expand...

Given that currently Merriam-Webster defines 'imitatress' as 'a female imitator' and given that even the 1913 edition of Webster's describes the word as 'archaic', BirdLife/HBW would seem to oddly insistent in making a rod for their own backs now that the 21st century has been with us for 20% of its existence...:eek!:

What's next? Researchers and researchesses? Birders and birdesses?
MJB
 
MJB said:
Given that currently Merriam-Webster defines 'imitatress' as 'a female imitator' and given that even the 1913 edition of Webster's describes the word as 'archaic', BirdLife/HBW would seem to oddly insistent in making a rod for their own backs now that the 21st century has been with us for 20% of its existence...:eek!:

What's next? Researchers and researchesses? Birders and birdesses?
MJB
Click to expand...

This would also be at odds with the liberal society we now live in where gender is not identified e.g there are only 'actors' now, no actresses, no 'comedienne' just a comedian and no 'WPC's' just 'Police officers'........
 
But note that Meliphaga is feminine. So imitatrix is perfectly reasonable and perhaps even required in the scientific name. It could be argued that "imitatrix" is an English word as well which means the same as the Latin word "imitatrix" and so using that as the English name is also perfectly reasonable.
 
I feel your argument would hold for using 'Imitatrix Honeyeater' but not 'Imitatress Honeyeater'. (without otherwise having strong feelings about the names of this bird).

Niels
 
So much for aligning the various taxonomies, I though Imitatress Honeyeater was a ludicrous choice, but there we are....
 
MJB said:
Given that currently Merriam-Webster defines 'imitatress' as 'a female imitator' and given that even the 1913 edition of Webster's describes the word as 'archaic', BirdLife/HBW would seem to oddly insistent in making a rod for their own backs now that the 21st century has been with us for 20% of its existence...:eek!:

What's next? Researchers and researchesses? Birders and birdesses?
MJB
Click to expand...

RuPaul's Honeyeater it is then? ;)
 
Xena M. Mapel, Ethan F. Gyllenhaal, Tejashree H. Modak, Lucas H. DeCicco, Alivereti Naikatini, Ruth B. Utzurrum, Joshua O. Seamon, Alice Cibois, Jean-Claude Thibault, Michael D. Sorenson, Robert G. Moyle, Lisa N. Barrow, Michael J. Andersen, Inter- and intra-archipelago dynamics of population structure and gene flow in a Polynesian bird, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 2020, 107034, ISSN 1055-7903, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2020.107034.

Abstract:
Islands are separated by natural barriers that prevent gene flow between terrestrial populations and promote allopatric diversification. Birds in the South Pacific are an excellent model to explore the interplay between isolation and gene flow due to the region’s numerous archipelagos and well-characterized avian communities. The wattled honeyeater complex (Foulehaio spp.) comprises three allopatric species that are widespread and common across Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, and Wallis and Futuna. Here, we explored patterns of diversification within and among these lineages using genomic and morphometric data. We found support for three clades of Foulehaio corresponding to three recognized species. Within F. carunculatus, population genetic analyses identified nine major lineages, most of which were composed of sub-lineages that aligned nearly perfectly to individual island populations. Despite genetic structure and great geographic distance between populations, we found low levels of gene flow between populations in adjacent archipelagos. Additionally, body size of F. carunculatus varied randomly with respect to evolutionary history (as Ernst Mayr predicted), but correlated negatively with island size, consistent with the island rule. Our findings support a hypothesis that widespread taxa can show population structure between immediately adjacent islands, and likely represent many independent lineages loosely connected by gene flow.
 
Robledo-Ruiz, D.A., H.M. Gan, P. Kaur, O. Dudchenko, D. Weisz, R. Khan, E.L. Aiden, E. Osipova, M. Hiller, H.E. Morales, M.J.L. Magrath, R.H. Clarke, P. Sunnucks, and A. Pavlova (2022)
Chromosome-length genome assembly and linkage map of a critically endangered Australian bird: the helmeted honeyeater
GigaScience 11: giac025
doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giac025

Background
The helmeted honeyeater (Lichenostomus melanops cassidix) is a Critically Endangered bird endemic to Victoria, Australia. To aid its conservation, the population is the subject of genetic rescue. To understand, monitor, and modulate the effects of genetic rescue on the helmeted honeyeater genome, a chromosome-length genome and a high-density linkage map are required.

Results
We used a combination of Illumina, Oxford Nanopore, and Hi-C sequencing technologies to assemble a chromosome-length genome of the helmeted honeyeater, comprising 906 scaffolds, with length of 1.1 Gb and scaffold N50 of 63.8 Mb. Annotation comprised 57,181 gene models. Using a pedigree of 257 birds and 53,111 single-nucleotide polymorphisms, we obtained high-density linkage and recombination maps for 25 autosomes and Z chromosome. The total sex-averaged linkage map was 1,347 cM long, with the male map being 6.7% longer than the female map. Recombination maps revealed sexually dimorphic recombination rates (overall higher in males), with average recombination rate of 1.8 cM/Mb. Comparative analyses revealed high synteny of the helmeted honeyeater genome with that of 3 passerine species (e.g., 32 Hi-C scaffolds mapped to 30 zebra finch autosomes and Z chromosome). The genome assembly and linkage map suggest that the helmeted honeyeater exhibits a fission of chromosome 1A into 2 chromosomes relative to zebra finch. PSMC analysis showed a ∼15-fold decline in effective population size to ∼60,000 from mid- to late Pleistocene.

Conclusions
The annotated chromosome-length genome and high-density linkage map provide rich resources for evolutionary studies and will be fundamental in guiding conservation efforts for the helmeted honeyeater.
 
Hay, E.M., M.D. McGee, and S.L. Chown (2022)
Geographic range size and speciation in honeyeaters
BMC Ecology and Evolution 22: 86
doi: 10.1186/s12862-022-02041-6

Background
Darwin and others proposed that a species’ geographic range size positively influences speciation likelihood, with the relationship potentially dependent on the mode of speciation and other contributing factors, including geographic setting and species traits. Several alternative proposals for the influence of range size on speciation rate have also been made (e.g. negative or a unimodal relationship with speciation). To examine Darwin’s proposal, we use a range of phylogenetic comparative methods, focusing on a large Australasian bird clade, the honeyeaters (Aves: Meliphagidae).

Results
We consider the influence of range size, shape, and position (latitudinal and longitudinal midpoints, island or continental species), and consider two traits known to influence range size: dispersal ability and body size. Applying several analytical approaches, including phylogenetic Bayesian path analysis, spatiophylogenetic models, and state-dependent speciation and extinction models, we find support for both the positive relationship between range size and speciation rate and the influence of mode of speciation.

Conclusions
Honeyeater speciation rate differs considerably between islands and the continental setting across the clade’s distribution, with range size contributing positively in the continental setting, while dispersal ability influences speciation regardless of setting. These outcomes support Darwin’s original proposal for a positive relationship between range size and speciation likelihood, while extending the evidence for the contribution of dispersal ability to speciation.
 
albertonykus said:
Hay, E.M., M.D. McGee, and S.L. Chown (2022)
Geographic range size and speciation in honeyeaters
BMC Ecology and Evolution 22: 86
doi: 10.1186/s12862-022-02041-6

Background
Darwin and others proposed that a species’ geographic range size positively influences speciation likelihood, with the relationship potentially dependent on the mode of speciation and other contributing factors, including geographic setting and species traits. Several alternative proposals for the influence of range size on speciation rate have also been made (e.g. negative or a unimodal relationship with speciation). To examine Darwin’s proposal, we use a range of phylogenetic comparative methods, focusing on a large Australasian bird clade, the honeyeaters (Aves: Meliphagidae).

Results
We consider the influence of range size, shape, and position (latitudinal and longitudinal midpoints, island or continental species), and consider two traits known to influence range size: dispersal ability and body size. Applying several analytical approaches, including phylogenetic Bayesian path analysis, spatiophylogenetic models, and state-dependent speciation and extinction models, we find support for both the positive relationship between range size and speciation rate and the influence of mode of speciation.

Conclusions
Honeyeater speciation rate differs considerably between islands and the continental setting across the clade’s distribution, with range size contributing positively in the continental setting, while dispersal ability influences speciation regardless of setting. These outcomes support Darwin’s original proposal for a positive relationship between range size and speciation likelihood, while extending the evidence for the contribution of dispersal ability to speciation.
Click to expand...
Now, no doubt that Pycnopygius cinereus and ixoides need a new genus, maybe "Pinaromyza"
 
Last edited:
Molecular data show that Meliphagidae can be divided into two subfamilies: Meliphaginae and Myzinae. However the name Myzinae (Myzina, Myzini) is a clade within aphid family. In such a case, can a subfamily rank taxon be described from a synonymous genus (here Orodytes) ?
 
Jim LeNomenclatoriste said:
In such a case, can a subfamily rank taxon be described from a synonymous genus (here Orodytes) ?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not.
The name of the type genus of any new family-group name must be treated as a "valid generic name" -- i.e., as the valid name of a full genus -- included in the new family-group taxon in the work where the family-group name is introduced. This is a requirement for the availability of any new family-group name (Art. 11.7.1.1 of ICZN), whatever the date on which it was proposed: if you depart from this, the name of the family-group taxon is unavailable.

What you are expected to do, under current rules, is to choose a stem for the name of the type genus that will avoid homonymy with any already available family-group name. See Art. 29.6 of ICZN. The stem must be formed as if the name was an arbitrary combination of letters, i.e., in agreement with Art. 29.3.3.
Here, if you want to recognise a family-group taxon that would include a single valid genus called Myza Meyer & Wiglesworth 1895, and there is already a Myzini Mordvilko 1914 (type Myzus Passerini 1860, Hemiptera), you could name this taxon Myzaidae (choosing Myza- as the stem) to avoid homonymy with Myzini.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Daniel Philippe
Rhegmatorhina
Replies
2
Views
847
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Peter Kovalik
Evolution Meetings
Replies
1
Views
1K
Murray Lord
M
Richard Klim
Whipbirds & wedgebills
Replies
1
Views
867
Richard Klim
Richard Klim
Richard Klim
Black Butcherbird
Replies
0
Views
720
Richard Klim
Richard Klim
Richard Klim
Passerina bunting hybridisation
Replies
3
Views
2K
Peter Kovalik
Peter Kovalik

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top