Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Furnariidae

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Saturday 19th May 2018, 19:55   #51
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Furnariinae

TiF Update May 19

Furnariinae: I have accepted several splits from IOC and Ridgely/Tudor (2009). Subspecies are allocated as in IOC.

Pacific Tuftedcheek, Pseudocolaptes johnsoni, is split from Buffy Tuftedcheek, Pseudocolaptes lawrencii.
Pacific Hornero, Furnarius cinnamomeus, and Caribbean Hornero, Furnarius longirostris, are split from Pale-legged Hornero, Furnarius leucopus.
Striped Woodhaunter, Automolus subulatus, is split into Western Woodhaunter, Automolus virgatus and Eastern Woodhaunter, Automolus subulatus.
Plain Thornbird, Phacellodomus inornatus is split from Rufous-fronted Thornbird, Phacellodomus rufifrons
Creamy-breasted Canastero, Asthenes dorbignyi is split into Pale-tailed Canastero, Asthenes huancavelicae, Rusty-vented Canastero, Asthenes dorbignyi, and Dark-winged Canastero, Asthenes arequipae.
Baron's Spinetail, Cranioleuca baroni, has been lumped into Line-cheeked Spinetail, Cranioleuca antisiensis. See Seeholzer and Brumfield (2018) and SACC Proposal 762.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th June 2018, 07:58   #52
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Phacellodomus sibilatrix

Smith P. (2018) The identity of Sylvia ruficollis Vieillot, 1817 and Azara’s No. 240 “Cola aguda cola de canela obscura” (Aves: Furnariidae).. ARDEA 106 (1): 79-83.

Abstract:

The identity of Azara’s No. 240 “Cola aguda cola de canela obscura” and the name Sylvia ruficollis Vieillot, 1817 which is based on it has been widely discussed, but never convincingly elucidated. Azara obtained the specimen from the “barbarians of Paraguay" and the distinctive tail pattern that he described narrows the identity down to three species in the Paraguayan avifauna, two in the genus Asthenes and Phacellodomus sibilatrix. Much confusion about the identity of Azara’s birds has been previously caused by Vieillot’s tendency to omit the morphometrics provided in the original description. In this case, it is possible to confirm the identity of Sylvia ruficollis as Phacellodomus sibilatrix. In order to maintain nomenclatural stability, it is recommended that the older name Sylvia ruficollis be suppressed.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th June 2018, 10:32   #53
Mike Earp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sanderstead
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Smith P. (2018) The identity of Sylvia ruficollis Vieillot, 1817 and Azara’s No. 240 “Cola aguda cola de canela obscura” (Aves: Furnariidae).. ARDEA 106 (1): 79-83.
Full article available here.
Mike Earp is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 7th November 2018, 15:15   #54
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Pinto Ledezma, J. N., Jahn, A. E., Cueto, V. R., Diniz-Filho, J. A. F., & Villalobos, F. (2018). Drivers of phylogenetic assemblage structure of the Furnariides, a widespread clade of lowland Neotropical birds. The American Naturalist. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Abstract:

Species co-occurrence in local assemblages is shaped by distinct processes at different spatial and temporal scales. Here we focus on historical explanations and examine the phylogenetic structure of local assemblages of the Furnariides clade (Aves: Passeriformes), assessing the influence of diversification rates on the assembly and species co-occurrence within those assemblages. Using 120 local assemblages across Bolivia and Argentina and a nearly complete phylogeny for the clade, we analyzed assemblage phylogenetic structure applying a recently developed model (DAMOCLES) accounting for the historical processes of speciation, colonization and local extinction. We also evaluated how diversification rates determine species co-occurrence. We found that the assembly of Furnariides assemblages can largely be explained by speciation, colonization and local extinction without invoking current local species interactions. Phylogenetic structure of open habitat assemblages mainly showed clustering, characterized by faster rates of colonization and local extinction than in forest habitats, whereas forest habitat assemblages were congruent with the model’s equal rates expectation, thus highlighting the influence of habitat preferences on assembly and co-occurrence patterns. Our results suggest that historical processes are sufficient to explain local assemblage phylogenetic structure, while there is little evidence for species ecological interactions in avian assemblage diversity and composition.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 7th November 2018, 16:33   #55
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 704
Speaking of Furnariidae, I would like to know the status of genus Dendroma Swainson, 1837, which could be used for ''Philydor'' erythropterum and ''Philydor'' rufum , if it is available, valid or not at all.
LeNomenclatoriste is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th November 2018, 13:12   #56
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste View Post
Speaking of Furnariidae, I would like to know the status of genus Dendroma Swainson, 1837, which could be used for ''Philydor'' erythropterum and ''Philydor'' rufum , if it is available, valid or not at all.
The name is certainly available (in the nomenclatural sense of the term), and I'd say it can be used; but the issue seems a bit more complicated than indicated, i.a., higher up in the present thread.

OD:
  • Under the ICZN, the name is available from Swainson 1836 [here] without any included species.
    (And thus not Swainson 1837; in 1836, Swainson gave some generic characters, and associated two figures to the name: each one of these two acts separately would have qualified as an indication, making the name available, under the ICZN. Under the old AOU code, it is likely that the 1836 publication would have been regarded as insufficient -- no 'identifiable' species included, stated characters deemed insufficient to define the taxon -- and this may be why the 1836 use seems to have been 'forgotten' in a portion of the ornithological literature. Of course, this old code is in principle now irrelevant, even though a good part of our nomenclature still rests on interpretations that were made under it. A generic name cannot be 'rejected' based on this type of considerations under the ICZN.)
Immediately subsequent works having no nomenclatural significance:
  • In 1837 [here], Swainson described the taxon in a more detailed way and cited a species, "Dendroma caniceps", which he based on "Braz. Birds, pl. 80". That should in principle mean the 80th plate of his Ornithological drawings; except that only 62 plates of this work appear to have been printed: if plate 80 was not published, Dendroma caniceps Swainson 1837 is a nomen nudum, and Dendroma remained here without any included nominal species.
  • Gray 1840 [here] merely cited Dendroma caniceps Swainson as the type. Dendroma remained without any included nominal species.
  • Selby 1840 [here] merely cited Dendroma caniceps as the type. Dendroma remained without any included nominal species.
  • Strickland 1840 [here], commenting on Gray 1840, suggested the name ought to be a synonym of Philydor Spix, without citing any species. Dendroma remained without any included nominal species.
  • Gray 1841 [here] placed the name in the synonymy of Diglossa Wagler. This changed nothing.
These seem to be the critical works:
  • Strickland 1842 [here], commenting on Gray 1841, disagreed with the synonymization, and reiterated that Dendroma had to be a synonym of Philydor, adding that it included Spix's superciliaris, albogularis and ruficollis. Evenhuis 2003 ([this]) dated this issue of Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (Vol. VIII, part LII) as of 1 Jan 1842.
  • Hartlaub 1842 [here], commenting on Gray 1841, disagreed with the synonymization, and suggested that D. caniceps Swainson is Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein 1823. This appeared in the Jun 1842 issue of the journal, thus presumably after Strickland 1842.
  • Gray 1846 [here] cited Anabates poliocephalus Lichtenstein as the type, placing both Philydor ruficollis Spix and Dendroma caniceps Swainson among its synonyms.
Later works (not affecting type fixation):
  • Gray 1855 [here] cited Anabates poliocephalus Lichtenstein as the type.
  • Sclater 1890 cited Dendrocopus rufus Vieillot as the type [here], placing Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein, Philydor ruficollis Spix and Dendroma caniceps Swainson in its synonymy [here].
  • Ridgway 1911 [here] cited as type "D. caniceps Swainson = Dendrocopus rufus Vieillot".
  • Cory & Hellmayr 1925 [here] cited Gray 1855 as having fixed Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein ("=" Dendrocopus rufus Vieillot) as the type.

Had Hartlaub's 1842 comment appeared before Strickland's, a case might (perhaps) have been made that he had included Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein 1823 in Dendroma, making it the type by subsequent monotypy. If Strickland 1842 appeared first (which appears most likely), the originally included nominal species of Dendroma were fixed there (under [Art. 67.2.2 of the ICZN]) as Philydor superciliaris Spix 1824, Philydor albogularis Spix 1824 and Philydor ruficollis Spix 1824; only these three nominal species are then eligible to become the type (Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein 1823 is not); this makes Philydor ruficollis Spix 1824 the type by (indirect) subsequent designation of Gray 1846 (designation of Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein 1823, not an OINS, with the single OINS Philydor ruficollis Spix 1824 placed in its synonymy, resulting in the fixation of the latter under [Art. 69.2.2. of the ICZN]).

(Fortunately, as far as taxonomy goes, and in so far as Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein 1823 and Philydor ruficollis Spix 1824 are still both treated as subjective synonyms of Dendrocopus rufus Vieillot 1818, it's not really important which of them is the type. It's not always the case in this type of situation.)

Last edited by l_raty : Thursday 8th November 2018 at 13:44.
l_raty is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th November 2018, 14:38   #57
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 704
Holy mess, I didn't think this story was so complicated. Whatever, I use this genus to avoid placing these two species in Megaxenops as Boyd suggests

Last edited by LeNomenclatoriste : Thursday 8th November 2018 at 16:30. Reason: typo
LeNomenclatoriste is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th November 2018, 16:09   #58
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste View Post
Holy mess, I didn't think this story was so complicated. Whatever, I use this genus to avoid placing these two species in Megoxenops as Boyd suggests
Placing them in Megaxenops (1905) would require a reversal of precedence if Dendroma (1836) applies to them.

Going through the identification of the OINS (in principle, the nominal species cited by an available name in the OD; if there is none (as here), the nominal species cited by an available name first subsequently ascribed to the genus; only these are eligible to become the type) should normally always be the first step in assessing the type fixation of a generic name; but this is very often neglected. There are many type fixations that are widely accepted in birds, but do not take this into account at all. (Basically all of Brisson's names (only the names he cited from Linnaeus 1758 are available), many of Lacépède's names (no included species at all), quite a few names from Vieillot's Analyse (which had only French vernaculars cited in the OD -- the OINS are then usually in the Deterville Dictionnaire), etc.)

Last edited by l_raty : Thursday 8th November 2018 at 17:46.
l_raty is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 7th January 2019, 19:30   #59
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Xiphorhynchus atlanticus

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste View Post
Natalia C. García, Luciano N. Naka & Gustavo S. Cabanne. Vocal variation in relation to genetic structure in an Atlantic forest woodcreeper (Xiphorhynchus fuscus): evolutionary and taxonomic implications

Abstract
The analysis of intra-specific geographical variation is central to the study of the evolutionary and speciation processes, providing insights into the mechanisms leading to current diversity patterns. In the last decades, analyses of within-species variation moved its focus from phenotypic traits to the analysis of variation in genetic markers. Modern phylogeographic studies could be significantly improved by including detailed phenotypic variation analyses, allowing a better understanding of the biological processes driving similar or opposing patterns in phenotype and molecular markers differentiation. Here, we analyze vocal variation within the Lesser Woodcreeper (Xiphorhynchus fuscus), an Atlantic forest suboscine passerine, in relation to the genetic lineages previously described for this species. Our results show that two of the genetic clades within this species have their own vocal type, while the other two lineages share a common type. This finding supports the notion that the same events which modeled part of the genetic structure within X. fuscus also led to the accumulation of vocal differences. It also provides evidence to support the elevation of the subspecies atlanticus to a species-level taxon.

https://link.springer.com/article/10...336-017-1509-9
Proposal (809) to SACC

Recognize Xiphorhynchus atlanticus as a separate species from Xiphorhynchus fuscus
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 17th January 2019, 17:21   #60
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Syndactyla rufosuperciliata

Cabanne, G.S., Campagna, L., Trujillo-Arias, N., Naoki, K., Gómez, I., Miyaki, C.Y., Santos, F.R., P. M. Dantas, G., Aleixo, A., Claramunt, S., Rocha, A., Caparroz, R., Lovette, I.J., Tubaro, P.L., Phylogeographic variation within the Buff-browed Foliage-gleaner (Aves: Furnariidae: Syndactyla rufosuperciliata) supports an Andean-Atlantic forests connection via the Cerrado, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2019.01.011

Abstract:

We evaluated whether the Andean and the Atlantic forests acted as refugia during the Quaternary, and tested biogeographic hypotheses about the regions involved in the connectivity between those biomes (through the Chaco or the Cerrado). To achieve these goals we selected the Buff-browed Foliage-gleaner Syndactyla rufosuperciliata (Aves, Furnariidae) as a study system, a taxon distributed between the Andean and Atlantic forest. We first explored the historical connectivity between regions through niche modeling. We subsequently used DNA sequences (n=71 individuals) and genomic analyses (ddRADseq, n=33 individuals) to evaluate population genetic structure and gene flow within this species. Finally, we performed population model selection using Approximate Bayesian Computation. Our findings indicate that the Andean and the Atlantic forests acted as refugia, and that the populations of the focal species from both regions contacted through the Cerrado region, thus suggesting that the historical dynamics of Andean and Atlantic forests are important for the evolution of forest birds in the region. The results are in agreement with studies of other organisms and may indicate a more general pattern of connectivity among biomes in the Neotropics. Finally, we recommend recognizing both the Andean and the Altantic forests lineages of S. rufosuperciliata as independent species.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 25th January 2019, 07:09   #61
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Xenops rutilans/rutilus

Proposal (811) to SACC

Change the specific epithet of Xenops rutilans to rutilus
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th March 2019, 07:41   #62
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Cranioleuca sulphurifera and Limnoctites rectirostris

Proposal (815) to SACC

Generic placement and common names of Cranioleuca sulphurifera and Limnoctites rectirostris

Last edited by Peter Kovalik : Saturday 30th March 2019 at 07:44.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th March 2019, 07:43   #63
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Leptasthenura yanacensis and Sylviorthorhynchus desmursii

Proposal (816) to SACC

Generic placement and English names of Leptasthenura yanacensis and Sylviorthorhynchus desmursii
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th March 2019, 20:05   #64
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (815) to SACC

Generic placement and common names of Cranioleuca sulphurifera and Limnoctites rectirostris

Quote:
We recommend a NO vote to Option 2. This would result in an expanded, more heterogenous Cranioleuca
But placing C. sulphurifera in Limnoctites risk to create a small heterogeneous genus

The best option for me is the creation of a new genus (such as «Limnocerthia»), sister to Limnoctites. Despite their behavioral similarity, these species are very distinct.

Last edited by LeNomenclatoriste : Sunday 31st March 2019 at 16:13.
LeNomenclatoriste is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 19th April 2019, 06:26   #65
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (809) to SACC

Recognize Xiphorhynchus atlanticus as a separate species from Xiphorhynchus fuscus
Passed (18 April 2019). Not yet implemented; need proposal on English names.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 29th April 2019, 05:34   #66
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Proposal (819) to SACC

Transfer Philydor erythropterum and P. rufum to the genus Ancistrops

Quote:
Option B. Alternatively, P. erythropterum and P. rufum could be placed in the genus Dendroma Swainson 1837, whose type (by subsequent designation by Gray, 1855) is Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein = Dendrocopos rufum Vieillot. This option will leave A. strigilatus in its own traditional monotypic genus.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 29th April 2019, 05:48   #67
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 704
Quote:
Alternatively, P. erythropterum and P. rufum could be placed in the genus Dendroma Swainson 1837, whose type (by subsequent designation by Gray, 1855) is Sphenura poliocephala Lichtenstein = Dendrocopos rufum Vieillot.
I chose this option for the same reason given by Areta (divergence time) . Anyway, Dendroma has priority over Ancistrops

Last edited by LeNomenclatoriste : Monday 29th April 2019 at 05:54.
LeNomenclatoriste is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 30th April 2019, 08:44   #68
LeNomenclatoriste
Taxonomy and Shiny hunting
 
LeNomenclatoriste's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: La Rochelle (France)
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeNomenclatoriste View Post
Holy mess, I didn't think this story was so complicated. Whatever, I use this genus to avoid placing these two species in Megaxenops as Boyd suggests
My bad, not Megaxenops of course but Ancistrops
LeNomenclatoriste is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 4th May 2019, 06:49   #69
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Dendroma

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (819) to SACC

Transfer Philydor erythropterum and P. rufum to the genus Ancistrops
Proposal (823) to SACC

Resurrect the genus Dendroma Swainson 1837 for Philydor erythropterum and P. rufum
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 12th May 2019, 19:16   #70
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (816) to SACC

Generic placement and English names of Leptasthenura yanacensis and Sylviorthorhynchus desmursii
PASSED (11 May 2019)
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th May 2019, 18:44   #71
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Xiphorhynchus atlanticus

IOC Updates Diary May 11

Accept split of Atlantic Woodcreeper
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th May 2019, 07:30   #72
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Xiphorhynchus atlanticus and X. fuscus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (809) to SACC

Recognize Xiphorhynchus atlanticus as a separate species from Xiphorhynchus fuscus
Proposal (834) to SACC

Establish English names for Xiphorhynchus atlanticus and X. fuscus
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 21st May 2019, 06:21   #73
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (811) to SACC

Change the specific epithet of Xenops rutilans to rutilus
DID NOT PASS
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 21st May 2019, 09:07   #74
l_raty
laurent raty
 
l_raty's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
Proposal (811) to SACC
Change the specific epithet of Xenops rutilans to rutilus
DID NOT PASS
A quite ambiguous case, I would say.

In Latin, rutilus, -a, -um (=red) is a standard adjective; rutilans (= reddening) is the present participle of the verb rutilare.
Can two perfectly correct distinct Latin words with (even if slightly) different meanings be called two 'spellings' of a single name ?
If rutilus can be a variant spelling of rutilans, does this extent to similar cases where the difference between the stems of the adjective and verb are more pronounced ? rufus and rufescans, ruber and rubricans ? If rutilus can be a variant spelling of rutilans, why not, actually, rufus, or ruber ? Obviously, there must be a limit, but where does it lie...?

Last edited by l_raty : Tuesday 21st May 2019 at 20:53.
l_raty is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd June 2019, 10:24   #75
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,924
Thripophagini

Esther Quintero, Utku PERKTAŞ, Phylogeny of Thripophagini ovenbirds (Aves: Synallaxinae: Furnariidae), Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, , blz062, https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/blz062

Abstract:

In this study, we address the evolutionary relationships and discuss the biogeographical history of a complex and diverse group of ovenbirds, the Thripophagini. We reconstruct the phylogeny and estimate the time of divergence of this group, using sequences from two complete mitochondrial genes (cytochrome b and NADH subunit 2) from a total of 115 fresh tissue samples. The results provide a better understanding of the phylogenetic relationships of the taxa within this group, some of which require a thorough taxonomic revision. We discuss the biogeographical history of the group, and find parallels with other previously studied Andean birds which may indicate that tectonic and climatic events might, at least in part, be linked to its diversification through the uplift of the Andes, the creation of new montane habitats and barriers, the evolution of Amazonian drainages and landscapes, and the climatic oscillations of the Pleistocene.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Furnariidae Peter Kovalik Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 3 Sunday 6th December 2009 16:47
Category:Furnariidae AlexC Opus Discussion Area 2 Thursday 30th October 2008 20:27

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.29596591 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:38.