• 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.

Gruiformes and Charadriiformes (1 Viewer)

Peter Kovalik

Well-known member
Slovakia
Chen, P., Z. Huang, C. Zhu, Y. Han, Z. Xu, G. Sun, Z. Zhang, D. Zhao, G. Ge and L. Ruan (2020), Complete mitochondrial genome and phylogenetic analysis of Gruiformes and Charadriiformes, Pakistan J. Zool. 52(2), 425-439. DOI: 10.17582/journal.pjz/20190603010623.

Abstract:

In this study, we used the next-generation sequencing method to obtain mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of Porzana paykullii, Rallus aquaticus and Gallirallus striatus in Gruiformes, and Hydrophasianus chirurgus in Charadriiformes, after which we analysed and compared structure, phylogeny, and taxonomic origin of the Gruiformes and Charadriiformes. Based on sequencing, splicing, and annotating the mtDNA of four birds, the results showed that the lengths of mtDNA were 16,955 bp in Porzana paykullii, 17,149 bp in Rallus aquaticus, 17,647 bp in Gallirallus striatus and 16,855 bp in Hydrophasianus chirurgus, respectively. The base compositions were A > C > T > G in 73 species complete mitochondrial sequences in Gruiformes and Charadriiformes. The total AT content in the 73 species was larger than that of GC. The start codons in protein-coding genes (PCGs) included ATG, GTG, ATT, ATC and ATA, while its stop codons included TAA, TAG, AGG, AGA and the incomplete cipher T. In PCGs, the highest frequency of codon was CTA (Leu). The highest frequency of amino acids was Leu, whereas the lowest was Cys. In phylogenetic analyses, Gruiformes included Grui and Ralli, and Charadriformes included Charadrii, Lari and Scolopaci. The genus Porzana was closest to Porphyrio. Gallirallus striatus and Lewinia muelleri consisted a sister group, while Rallus aquaticus was a separate branch. Hydrophasianus chirurgus (Charadriiformes: Jacanidae) was closely related to Rostratulidae. According to the estimation of divergence time corrected by fossil records of related birds and compared with previous studies, the base divergence time of Gruiformes was 46.33 (58.46~25.60) Ma, the emergence time of the suborders Grui was about 17.62 (29.76~4.15) Ma, and the emergence time of the suborders of the Ralli was about 32.18 (46.17~19.69) Ma. The origin time of Charadriiformes was about 45.44 (58.21~24.67) Ma. The origin time of the Charadrii was 44.52 Ma (52.66 ~ 23.55 Ma). The divergence time of Charadrii, Lari and Scolopaci was about 33.46 (43.44~22.92) Ma, 29.10 (40.67~16.43) Ma and 27.06 (34.83 ~ 12.72) Ma, respectively.

[full text]
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France

Acanthis

Well-known member
I am indeed hallucinating!!

"Haematopodoidea"? I have a simpler solution 😉

Finally! Someone tackling Vanellus.
And Oreopholus way out there by itself.
Great stuff!
 
Last edited:

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
I am indeed hallucinating!!

"Haematopodoidea"? I have a simpler solution 😉

Finally! Someone tackling Vanellus.
And Oreopholus way out there by itself.
Great stuff!
I had touched on the taxonomy of Vanellus and I had split it into many others. I don't think I will touch my taxonomy, or very little.
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Great paper...wish they tackled what should or shouldn't be a family, since the dates here seem more reasonable than all of the prior papers focused on this clade. It would be nice if an effort was made to figure out just what should count as a family within Charadriiformes, since there is still some confusion here

Also surprised just how much Taxonomy in flux is cited in this paper
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
looking over these this and the Rallidae paper, so sort of stream of consciousness style thoughts might be posted on this forum this morning

Surprised the paper doesn't bring up that Jack Snipe was recovered as sister to godwits, since that seems...weird
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Definitely putting Pluvianellus into Chionidae - even wondering if I should keep it as a subfamily
Similar argument could be made for Pedionomidae and Thinocoridae, if you contrast it with the other divergences in Scolopaci. Those different subfamilies are OLD (Tringinae vs Arenariinae is late Eocene!)...makes me wonder if they wouldn't be better treated as family level taxon?
 

TomDerutter

Well-known member
What exactly is Burhinus magnirostris in this study?

Based on it's position, I don't think it's Beach Thick-knee (Esacus magnirostris)
Bush Thick-knee (Burhinus grallarius, obsolete name Burhinus magnirostris) seems incuded as Burhinus grallarius
so ??

edit: Burhinus indicus is missing, so might be a typo for this?
 

Acanthis

Well-known member
Great paper...wish they tackled what should or shouldn't be a family, since the dates here seem more reasonable than all of the prior papers focused on this clade. It would be nice if an effort was made to figure out just what should count as a family within Charadriiformes, since there is still some confusion here
Me too. I suspect most folk will prefer a subjective "what feels right" approach.
 

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Already split the rest of this Family in my own list. Feels somewhat heretical.🙂
But the part of me that puts the oystercatchers in Recurvirostridae says "Yeah? So what!".
Yeah, I think a reasonable choice could be made to lump them into one family, although I would still recognize them as separate subfamilies

Splitting Scolopacidae still feels dirty, although if the dates are correct here, it's hard not to justify it. And they are probably more morphologically divergent than many good songbird families

EDIT: used families instead of subfamilies
 
Last edited:

Acanthis

Well-known member
And the "Bec-d'ibis", you know what bird I mean
But of course! Don't get hung up on bill shape.
What these guys all have in common is that they've diverged early on from the plover norm.
Plovers run a few steps and pause and look, and so on. You can't use this strategy if you're foraging for shellfish on tidal rocks, or tiny shrimps in lakes, or insect larvae concealed under glacial boulders.
What we're missing is the intermediate forms which were probably replaced by the current genera a long, long time ago.
 
Last edited:

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Absolutely no idea to handle Glareolidae...whose difficulty is not made easier by having the early-diverging genera paraphyletic
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top