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.

Thraupidae

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 4.20 average.
Old Saturday 29th September 2012, 07:09   #1
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Thraupidae

Shultz & Burns (in press). Plumage evolution in relation to light environment in a novel clade of Neotropical tanagers. Mol Phylogenet Evol. [abstract]
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th October 2012, 14:08   #2
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
TiF

John Boyd (TiF):
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html [20 Oct 2012]
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/List32.html#thraupidae

Ref: Shultz & Burns (in press). [pdf]
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th November 2012, 10:39   #3
Daniel Philippe
Registered User
 
Daniel Philippe's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: France
Posts: 1,018
Mason, N. A., 2012. Song complexity and its evolutionary correlates across a continent-wide radiation of songbirds. Faculty of San Diego State University: 1-90.

pdf
Daniel Philippe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 07:06   #4
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Burns et al

Burns, Shultz, Title, Mason, Barker, Klicka, Lanyon & Lovette (in press). Phylogenetics and diversification of tanagers (Passeriformes: Thraupidae), the largest radiation of Neotropical songbirds. Mol Phylogenet Evol. [abstract]

Subfamilies:
  1. Catamblyrhynchinae Ridgway, 1901 (Plushcap): Catamblyrhynchus
  2. Charitospizinae new subfamily (Coal-crested Finch): Charitospiza
  3. Orchesticinae new subfamily (grosbeak tanagers): Orchesticus, Parkerthraustes
  4. Nemosiinae Bonaparte, 1854 (flock-dwelling tanagers): Compsothraupis, Cyanicterus, Nemosia, Sericossypha
  5. Hemithraupinae Sundevall, 1872 (yellow-and-black tanagers): Chlorophanes, Chrysothlypis, Hemithraupis, Heterospingus, Iridophanes
  6. Porphyrospizinae new subfamily (yellow-billed tanagers): Incaspiza, Phrygilus alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti, Porphyrospiza
  7. Dacninae Sundevall, 1836 (blue tanagers): Cyanerpes, Dacnis, Tersina
  8. Saltatorinae Bonaparte, 1853 (saltators): Saltator (except S rufiventris), Saltatricula
  9. Emberizoidinae new subfamily (grassland tanagers): Coryphaspiza, Emberizoides, Embernagra
  10. Coerebinae d'Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1838 (dome-nesting tanagers): Camarhynchus, Certhidea, Coereba, Euneornis, Geospiza, Loxigilla, Loxipasser, Melanospiza, Melopyrrha, Pinaroloxias, Platyspiza, Tiaris
  11. Tachyphoninae Bonaparte, 1853 (ornamented tanagers): Conothraupis, Coryphospingus, Creurgops, Eucometis, Lanio, Ramphocelus, Rhodospingus, Tachyphonus, Trichothraupis, Volatinia
  12. Sporophilinae Ridgway, 1901 (seedeaters): Dolospingus, Oryzoborus, Sporophila
  13. Poospizinae Wolters, 1980 (warbler tanagers): Cnemoscopus, Compsospiza, Cypsnagra, Donacospiza, Hemispingus, Nephelornis, Piezorina, Poospiza, Pyrrhocoma, Thlypopsis, Urothraupis, Xenospingus
  14. Diglossinae Sclater, 1875 (highland tanagers): Acanthidops, Catamenia, Conirostrum, Diglossa, Diuca speculifera, Haplospiza, Idiopsar, Melanodera, Nesospiza, Oreomanes, Phrygilus (except P alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti), Rowettia, Sicalis, Xenodacnis
  15. Thraupinae Cabanis, 1847 (core tanagers): Anisognathus, Bangsia, Buthraupis, Calochaetes, Chlorochrysa, Chlorornis, Cissopis, Cnemathraupis, Diuca diuca, Dubusia, Gubernatrix, Iridosornis, Lophospingus, Neothraupis, Paroaria, Pipraeidea, Saltator rufiventris, Schistochlamys, Stephanophorus, Tangara, Thraupis, Wetmorethraupis
Suggested possible changes to genera...

Porphyrospizinae:
  • Phrygilus alaudinus, P carbonarius > Corydospiza Sundevall, 1872
  • Phrygilus fruticeti > Rhopospina Cabanis, 1851
Saltatorinae:
  • Saltatricula > Saltator
Coerebinae:
  • Certhidea fusca > new genus ?
  • Loxigilla portoricensis, L violacea > Melopyrrha
  • Tiaris bicolor > Melanospiza
  • Tiaris canorus > Phonipara Gray, 1850
  • Tiaris fuliginosa, T obscurus > new genus
Tachyphoninae:
  • Tachyphonus cristatus, T luctuosus, T rufiventer > new genus
  • Tachyphonus delatrii > new genus
  • Tachyphonus surinamus > new genus
Sporophilinae:
  • Dolospingus, Oryzoborus > Sporophila
Poospizinae:
  • Hemispingus atropileus, H calophrys, H parodii, H reyi > new genus
  • Hemispingus frontalis, H melanotis > Sphenops Sclater, 1862
  • Hemispingus goeringi, H rufosuperciliaris > Orospingus Riley, 1922
  • Hemispingus verticalis, H xanthophthalmus > Pseudospingus Berlepsch & Stolzmann, 1896
  • Hemispingus superciliaris, Pyrrhocoma > Thlypopsis
  • Hemispingus trifasciatus, Poospiza alticola, P cabanisi, P cinerea, P erythrophrys, P lateralis, P melanoleuca, P torquata > Microspingus Taczanowski, 1874
  • Poospiza caesar, P hypochondria > Poospizopsis Berlepsch, 1893
  • Poospiza hispaniolensis > new genus
  • Poospiza rubecula > new genus
  • Poospiza thoracica > new genus
Diglossinae:
  • Haplospiza rustica > Spodiornis Sclater, 1866
  • Idiopsar, Phrygilus dorsalis, P erythronotus > Diuca
  • Oreomanes > Conirostrum
  • Phrygilus plebejus, P unicolor > Geospizopsis Bonaparte, 1856
Thraupinae:
  • Buthraupis wetmorei > Tephrophilus Moore, 1934
  • Diuca diuca > Hedyglossa Reichenbach, 1851
  • Saltator rufiventris > Dubusia or new genus
  • Tangara ornata > T argentea Lafresnaye, 1943
  • Thraupis abbas, T cyanoptera, T episcopus, T glaucocolpa, T ornata, T palmarum, T sayaca > Tangara
  • Thraupis cyanocephala > Sporathraupis Ridgway, 1898

Last edited by Richard Klim : Thursday 27th February 2014 at 06:12. Reason: Certhidea?
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 18:17   #5
Xenospiza
Undescribed
 
Xenospiza's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In a drawer
Posts: 10,616
Wow, plenty of room for taxonomic vandalism there.

I have some ideas for T. surinamus... but I'll behave!
Xenospiza is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 18:22   #6
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenospiza View Post
Wow, plenty of room for taxonomic vandalism there.
Yes, I didn't like to suggest it! Where's George...?
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 18:58   #7
Cadu Agne
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 14
Two Thlypopsis ruficeps!

Two Thlypopsis ruficeps:

T. ruficeps (d’Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1837) - Rust-and-yellow Tanager
T. ruficeps (Strickland, 1844) (Pyrrhocoma ruficeps) - Chestnut-headed Tanager
Cadu Agne is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 19:11   #8
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadu Agne View Post
Two Thlypopsis ruficeps:

T. ruficeps (d’Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1837) - Rust-and-yellow Tanager
T. ruficeps (Strickland, 1844) (Pyrrhocoma ruficeps) - Chestnut-headed Tanager
Good catch Cadu.
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 19:15   #9
gusasp
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadu Agne View Post
Two Thlypopsis ruficeps:

T. ruficeps (d’Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1837) - Rust-and-yellow Tanager
T. ruficeps (Strickland, 1844) (Pyrrhocoma ruficeps) - Chestnut-headed Tanager
John Boyd:

Quote:
The Rust-and-yellow has priority (d'Orbigny and Lafresnay, 1837) over the Chestnut-headed (Strickland, 1844). However, there seem to be no junior names for the Chestnut-headed. For now, I distinguish it as “ruficeps”.
By the way, there's some heavy duty oversplitting of genera going on here isn't there? You'd really avoid some headache by following Boyd, only two new genera to name: Hemispingus atropileus and friends + Poospiza thoracica. Plus of course "Saltator" rufiventris.

I find two interesting discrepancies between Boyd's tree and your summary Richard:
* Certhidae fusca > new genus – is C. fusca not sister to C. olivacea (from which it was split not long ago)?
* Diuca diuca > Hedyglossa but Idiopsar, Phrygilus dorsalis, P erythronotus > Diuca. So Diuca speculifera is not at all related to D. diuca?

And what about "Sicalis" citrina and "Geospiza" difficilis?
gusasp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 19:31   #10
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,926
By J. Penhallurick Pyrrhocoma ruficeps is a synonym of Thlypopsis castaneiceps
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th February 2014, 19:39   #11
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusasp View Post
Certhidae fusca > new genus – is C. fusca not sister to C. olivacea (from which it was split not long ago)?
"...as in Petren et al. (2005), we found that the two species of Certhidea do not form a monophyletic clade, with C. fusca more closely related to the rest of the Darwin's Finches than it is to C. olivacea. However, this relationship was not strongly supported in our data set. If additional data continue to uphold paraphyly, retaining Certhidea for both of these species would be misleading. Thus, a new generic name will be needed for C. fusca to reflect accurately the relationship of these species to other birds."

['?' added to my summary.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusasp View Post
Diuca diuca > Hedyglossa but Idiopsar, Phrygilus dorsalis, P erythronotus > Diuca. So Diuca speculifera is not at all related to D. diuca?
"Our phylogenies are congruent with these differences and show the two Diuca species are distantly related, with D. speculifera belonging to Diglossinae and D. diuca belonging to Thraupinae..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusasp View Post
And what about "Sicalis" citrina and "Geospiza" difficilis?
"In our concatenated ML and BEAST analyses, Sicalis is not monophyletic, with S. citrina more closely related to species in the "yellow clade" than to other species in Sicalis. However, support for this relationship is not strong (0.84 PP; 62% bootstrap). In addition, none of the individual gene phylogenies provides strong support either for or against a monophyletic Sicalis (Supplementary Figs. 1-6). Given the lack of strong support for the position of S. citrina, additional data are needed to clarify the monophyly of Sicalis. Until then, despite the position of S. citrina in our concatenated phylogeny, we recommend that Sicalis be maintained for all species in the genus, given their morphological and behavioral similarities."

[Only one sample of Geospiza difficilis – nested within Geospiza.]

Last edited by Richard Klim : Wednesday 26th February 2014 at 19:50.
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 06:07   #12
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Klim View Post
Burns, Shultz, Title, Mason, Barker, Klicka, Lanyon & Lovette (in press). Phylogenetics and diversification of tanagers (Passeriformes: Thraupidae), the largest radiation of Neotropical songbirds. Mol Phylogenet Evol. [abstract]
John H. Boyd's A Taxonomy in Flux, February 28:
The tanagers have been restructured based on Burns et al. (2014).
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 07:55   #13
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Sphenops/Sphenopsis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kovalik View Post
John H. Boyd's A Taxonomy in Flux, February 28:
The tanagers have been restructured based on Burns et al. (2014).
Burns et al and John Boyd use Sphenops Sclater and Sphenopsis Sclater respectively.

Which is correct?
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 08:38   #14
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Klim View Post
Burns et al and John Boyd use Sphenops Sclater and Sphenopsis Sclater respectively.

Which is correct?
Sphenops Wagler, 1830 should have priority over Sphenops Sclater 1862 or?
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 09:01   #15
Peter Kovalik
Registered User
 
Peter Kovalik's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sp. Hrhov
Posts: 2,926
TiF vs World Bird Info

J. H. Boyd: "They had trouble with the Gray-capped Hemispingus, “Hemispingus” reyi, which is the basal member of this “Hemispingus” group. There does not seem to be an available name for the group, so I use “Hemispingus” for now."

J. Penhallurick: Grey-capped Hemispingus = Exospingus reyi

Also TiF: "Hemispingus" atropileus, auricularis and parodii
but WorldBirdInfo: Episkuniospingus

TiF: "Poospiza" thoracica
WBI: Paranospiza thoracica

Thraupidae by J. Penhallurick here (on the bottom of the page)

Last edited by Peter Kovalik : Saturday 1st March 2014 at 09:07. Reason: Paranospiza
Peter Kovalik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 4th March 2014, 21:10   #16
Snapdragyn
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 210
I can find no mention of Exospingus or Episkuniospingus online except for this thread & WorldBirdInfo, which does not list an authority or date for either genus.
Snapdragyn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 4th March 2014, 23:23   #17
mb1848
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Santa Maria, California USA
Posts: 2,047
Wagler in 1830 used Sphaenops for an amphibian genus.
http://books.google.com/books?id=L6U...page&q&f=false . page 161. Sphenops was one letter close to Wagler so not available in 19th Century? But is OK now? Sclater probably emended to Sphenopsis?
Sphenopsis in PZS: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...e/475/mode/1up .
Sphenops appears to be a misprint because it cites the PZS article which is clearly Sphenopsis.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...e/342/mode/1up .
edit: Correctamundo! (cite to Pulp fiction) In an errata Sclater says for Sphenops read Sphenopsis.
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/i...ge/10/mode/1up .
The 1861 PZS is possibly dated February 1862, (Sphenopsis). The Catalogue has to be later than May 1862 the date of the forward; (Sphenops fixed to Sphenopsis in errata).

Last edited by mb1848 : Tuesday 4th March 2014 at 23:45.
mb1848 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 8th March 2014, 17:29   #18
thyoloalethe
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Klim View Post
Burns, Shultz, Title, Mason, Barker, Klicka, Lanyon & Lovette (in press). Phylogenetics and diversification of tanagers (Passeriformes: Thraupidae), the largest radiation of Neotropical songbirds. Mol Phylogenet Evol. [abstract]

Subfamilies:
  1. Catamblyrhynchinae Ridgway, 1901 (Plushcap): Catamblyrhynchus
  2. Charitospizinae new subfamily (Coal-crested Finch): Charitospiza
  3. Orchesticinae new subfamily (grosbeak tanagers): Orchesticus, Parkerthraustes
  4. Nemosiinae Bonaparte, 1854 (flock-dwelling tanagers): Compsothraupis, Cyanicterus, Nemosia, Sericossypha
  5. Hemithraupinae Sundevall, 1872 (yellow-and-black tanagers): Chlorophanes, Chrysothlypis, Hemithraupis, Heterospingus, Iridophanes
  6. Porphyrospizinae new subfamily (yellow-billed tanagers): Incaspiza, Phrygilus alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti, Porphyrospiza
  7. Dacninae Sundevall, 1836 (blue tanagers): Cyanerpes, Dacnis, Tersina
  8. Saltatorinae Bonaparte, 1853 (saltators): Saltator (except S rufiventris), Saltatricula
  9. Emberizoidinae new subfamily (grassland tanagers): Coryphaspiza, Emberizoides, Embernagra
  10. Coerebinae d'Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1838 (dome-nesting tanagers): Camarhynchus, Certhidea, Coereba, Euneornis, Geospiza, Loxigilla, Loxipasser, Melanospiza, Melopyrrha, Pinaroloxias, Platyspiza, Tiaris
  11. Tachyphoninae Bonaparte, 1853 (ornamented tanagers): Conothraupis, Coryphospingus, Creurgops, Eucometis, Lanio, Ramphocelus, Rhodospingus, Tachyphonus, Trichothraupis, Volatinia
  12. Sporophilinae Ridgway, 1901 (seedeaters): Dolospingus, Oryzoborus, Sporophila
  13. Poospizinae Wolters, 1980 (warbler tanagers): Cnemoscopus, Compsospiza, Cypsnagra, Donacospiza, Hemispingus, Nephelornis, Piezorina, Poospiza, Pyrrhocoma, Thlypopsis, Urothraupis, Xenospingus
  14. Diglossinae Sclater, 1875 (highland tanagers): Acanthidops, Catamenia, Conirostrum, Diglossa, Diuca speculifera, Haplospiza, Idiopsar, Melanodera, Nesospiza, Oreomanes, Phrygilus (except P alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti), Rowettia, Sicalis, Xenodacnis
  15. Thraupinae Cabanis, 1847 (core tanagers): Anisognathus, Bangsia, Buthraupis, Calochaetes, Chlorochrysa, Chlorornis, Cissopis, Cnemathraupis, Diuca diuca, Dubusia, Gubernatrix, Iridosornis, Lophospingus, Neothraupis, Paroaria, Pipraeidea, Saltator rufiventris, Schistochlamys, Stephanophorus, Tangara, Thraupis, Wetmorethraupis
Is there any strong support for relationships between these 15 subfamilies? Or do they essentially form a polytomy, as seems apparent from the graphical abstract?

Also, was the Cherry-throated Tanager (Nemosia rourei) sampled for this study?

Thanks
Liam
thyoloalethe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 8th March 2014, 18:51   #19
andrew147
Registered User
 
andrew147's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by thyoloalethe View Post
Is there any strong support for relationships between these 15 subfamilies? Or do they essentially form a polytomy, as seems apparent from the graphical abstract?

Also, was the Cherry-throated Tanager (Nemosia rourei) sampled for this study?

Thanks
Liam
You should be able to see the relationships between the fifteen groups in the attached file. They are not all equal and equivalent and an argument could be made for fewer subfamilies divided into tribes.

No, no Cherry-throated Tanager - for which, considering its rarity, we should probably be thankful. They recommend retaining it in Nemosia:

"We were unable to include samples of the extremely rare and recently re-discovered N.
rourei
(Bauer et al., 2000; Scott, 1997). However, this species shares similarities with other
species in Nemosiinae that lead us to conclude that it belongs in this clade as well. Eye color,
plumage colors, and plumage patterns are similar between N. rourei and N. pileata. Also, S.
cristata, C. loricata,
and N. rourei have red throats, and the crowns of some individuals of N.
rourei
are white like those of S. cristata (as illustrated in Venturini et al., 2005). Venturini et al.
(2005) also note apparent similarities in courtship between N. pileata and N. rourei. Overall,
pending further analyses, we recommend retaining N. rourei in Nemosia".

Cheers
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Burns [2014] .jpg
Views:	237
Size:	104.6 KB
ID:	486590  
__________________
Mammals: 328 (Eurasian Beaver)
Birds: 2422 (Capped Wheatear)
Reptiles: 113 (Black Girdled Lizard)

Last edited by andrew147 : Saturday 8th March 2014 at 18:58.
andrew147 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th March 2014, 02:28   #20
thyoloalethe
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 183
Thanks Andrew - there's no asterisk next to any node below the subfamilies (except the one subtending the whole family), so I take it to mean that none of the sister relationships between the subfamilies are strongly supported, and the authors could only minimally name 15 subfamilies.

I appreciate the info on Nemosia rourei too!

Cheers
Liam
thyoloalethe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th March 2014, 03:47   #21
thyoloalethe
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 183
Just noticed something - with Oreomanes now subsumed within Conirostrum, the Giant Conebill Conirostrum fraseri (P.L. Sclater 1860) becomes a junior homonym to Conirostrum cinereum fraseri P.L. Sclater 1859 (subspecies of Cinereous Conebill). The next oldest name available for the Giant Conebill appears to be Conrirostrum binghami (Chapman 1919) - type locality: Cedrobamba ruins, Machu Picchu, Peru.

Liam

Last edited by thyoloalethe : Sunday 9th March 2014 at 03:51. Reason: closed bracket in wrong place; italics on all epithets
thyoloalethe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th March 2014, 07:47   #22
andrew147
Registered User
 
andrew147's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by thyoloalethe View Post
there's no asterisk next to any node below the subfamilies (except the one subtending the whole family), so I take it to mean that none of the sister relationships between the subfamilies are strongly supported, and the authors could only minimally name 15 subfamilies.
Yes, they say:

"Our analyses revealed 13 strongly-supported nodes relatively early in the tree that define novel subgroups of tanagers (Fig. 1) that we designate as subfamilies. These clades are the deepest nodes in the tree that are supported by either PP ≥ 0.95 or bootstrap ≥ 70%. All are recovered in both Bayesian and ML topologies, and most are also strongly supported by both. In addition, all but one of these subfamilies have significant support ( ≥ 0.95 PP) in the species tree analyses of Barker et al. (2013). Only two species (Catamblyrhynchus diadema and Charitospiza eucosma) did not cluster into one of these clades. Because of the distinctiveness of these two lineages, we place each into subfamilies as well. Although we identified these 15 major groups, we did not find strong support for relationships among them (Figs. 1, 2-6)".
__________________
Mammals: 328 (Eurasian Beaver)
Birds: 2422 (Capped Wheatear)
Reptiles: 113 (Black Girdled Lizard)
andrew147 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th March 2014, 07:32   #23
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Giant Conebill

Quote:
Originally Posted by thyoloalethe View Post
Just noticed something - with Oreomanes now subsumed within Conirostrum, the Giant Conebill Conirostrum fraseri (P.L. Sclater 1860) becomes a junior homonym to Conirostrum cinereum fraseri P.L. Sclater 1859 (subspecies of Cinereous Conebill). The next oldest name available for the Giant Conebill appears to be Conrirostrum binghami (Chapman 1919) - type locality: Cedrobamba ruins, Machu Picchu, Peru.
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html (9 Mar 2014)
www.jboyd.net/Taxo/List32.html#thraupidae
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 18th June 2014, 07:52   #24
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Mason et al 2014

Mason, Shultz & Burns 2014. Elaborate visual and acoustic signals evolve independently in a large, phenotypically diverse radiation of songbirds. Proc R Soc B 281(1788): 20140967. [abstract] [data suppl]
Richard Klim is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 18th June 2014, 20:35   #25
Richard Klim
-------------------------
 
Richard Klim's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 12,792
Mason et al 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Klim View Post
Mason, Shultz & Burns 2014. Elaborate visual and acoustic signals evolve independently in a large, phenotypically diverse radiation of songbirds. Proc R Soc B 281(1788): 20140967. [abstract] [data suppl]
Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 18 Jun 2014: Maybe Birds Can Have It All: Dazzling Colors and Pretty Songs.
Richard Klim 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
Emberizidae/Thraupidae Peter Kovalik Bird Taxonomy and Nomenclature 14 Tuesday 6th March 2012 18:53
So... how many tanagers (Thraupidae) have you seen? csanchez7 Birds & Birding 21 Monday 16th May 2011 20:33

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.34402299 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:01.