BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3588370" data-attributes="member: 24811">We still only have mtDNA, though - in fact Pérez-Emán et al did not produce any additional data from zusii itself, they used (a part of) the data that had been produced by Kirchman et al. (Kirchman et al published sequences of 111 + 64 bp of nd4 and flanking tRNAs [<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/GU166861.1" target="_blank">GU166861</a>], 110 + 71 bp of nd2 [<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/GU166851.1" target="_blank">GU166851</a>] = 356 bp of mtDNA in total; but Pérez-Emán et al only used the 181 bp of nd2.)The main reason why zusii is now thought to have been a hybrid is that its mtDNA was found to be identical to that which is present in some populations of sylphs, which suggests that the mother of the 'sunangel' was the same species as these. These particular populations had not been sampled by Kirchman et al, who had concluded that zusii (alt., its mother) was related to, yet distinct from sylphs. It's the "yet distinct from" part of this that was incorrect.(A very similar problem occurred in the description of Laniarius liberatus: the authors had sequenced a part of the cytochrome b of the holotype, found it to be distinct from other Laniarius spp, and regarded this as a confirmation of its species status. In fact, the mtDNA of L. liberatus is identical to that of L. erlangeri, which the authors regarded a ssp of L. aethiopicus and failed to include in their analysis -- only a nominate L. a. aethiopicus from Ethiopia had been included in the original data set.)</blockquote>

Verification