Latest IOC Diary Updates (1 Viewer)

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Two morphological analyses have independently concluded that the tongue structure of Carpospiza is that of a Passeridae.

It may be the result of a convergence between the passeridae and Carpospiza.

 

[l_raty]

It may be the result of a convergence between the passeridae and Carpospiza.

Bock 2004 went to great lengths to explain why it may not.

 

[Bismarck Honeyeater]

Externally, this bird doesn't share anything in common with Motacillidae, especially the shape of the wings...

Apart from the number of wings.

 

[DDonsker]

The fact that atypical Motacillidae exist is no valid argument to accept that something else totally unlike any other Motacillidae might be a Motacillidae too...
Two morphological analyses have independently concluded that the tongue structure of Carpospiza is that of a Passeridae. Is this tongue structure also shared by Motacillidae?
Can you tell us something about the nature of the data, David ?

Laurent,

Good question. The tongue morphology is new information for us. Can you provide a reference?

The taxonomic conclusion is derived from Fjeldså et al. 2020 who treat it as a subfamily of Motacillidae, Carpospizinae (see p. 63). It's a deep phylogenetic divergence (see Figure 14.2, p. 264), similar to that of Hypocryptadius within Passeridae, which they treat as a subfamily, too. Jim's suggestion that Carpospiza may deserve its own family should not be taken lightly (as could, arguably, Cinnamon Ibon).

Presumably, the phylogenetic study that Fjeldså et al. reference to help support their placement of this species in their phylogeny is Oliveros et al. 2019, but I can't find that taxon anywhere in that paper. Perhaps this data is buried deep in one of the appendices?

So, we're depending entirely on the conclusions of Fjeldså et al. 2020 for this conclusion.

David

 

[opisska]

Apart from the number of wings.

based on that it's quite clearly Diptera

 

[gusasp]

Laurent,

Good question. The tongue morphology is new information for us. Can you provide a reference?

The taxonomic conclusion is derived from Fjeldså et al. 2020 who treat it as a subfamily of Motacillidae, Carpospizinae (see p. 63). It's a deep phylogenetic divergence (see Figure 14.2, p. 264), similar to that of Hypocryptadius within Passeridae, which they treat as a subfamily, too. Jim's suggestion that Carpospiza may deserve its own family should not be taken lightly (as could, arguably, Cinnamon Ibon).

Presumably, the phylogenetic study that Fjeldså et al. reference to help support their placement of this species in their phylogeny is Oliveros et al. 2019, but I can't find that taxon anywhere in that paper. Perhaps this data is buried deep in one of the appendices?

So, we're depending entirely on the conclusions of Fjeldså et al. 2020 for this conclusion.

David

Here's an old thread with references and a tree by Laurent himself!

Petronia or Gymnoris

Hi, Wondering if someone knows what the ground is for classifying superciliaris, dentata, pyrgita and xanthocollis in the genus Gymnoris instead of Petronia? IOC, H&M and HBW all use Gymnoris, but Clements still have them in Petronia. Many thanks in advance! Markus

www.birdforum.net

 

[DDonsker]

Here's an old thread with references and a tree by Laurent himself!

Petronia or Gymnoris

Hi, Wondering if someone knows what the ground is for classifying superciliaris, dentata, pyrgita and xanthocollis in the genus Gymnoris instead of Petronia? IOC, H&M and HBW all use Gymnoris, but Clements still have them in Petronia. Many thanks in advance! Markus

www.birdforum.net

Thanks!

 

[Mysticete]

Sort of sounds like it might be worthwhile to hold off.

I actually think Cinnamon Ibon as its own family makes a lot of sense.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

The taxonomic conclusion is derived from Fjeldså et al. 2020 who treat it as a subfamily of Motacillidae, Carpospizinae (see p. 63). It's a deep phylogenetic divergence (see Figure 14.2, p. 264)

We would all like to see this figure if it's possible 🙂 thank you

.. similar to that of Hypocryptadius within Passeridae, which they treat as a subfamily, too. Jim's suggestion that Carpospiza may deserve its own family should not be taken lightly (as could, arguably, Cinnamon Ibon).

I'm even sure those who run their own checklists (like me) will place the ibon and pale rockfinch in their own family independently of the opinion of IOC or other so-called reference sources.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

based on that it's quite clearly Diptera

That's a lot of birds

 

[Acanthis]

I guess so from the reference to Fjeldså et al. 2020. Unfortunately, the recent phylogeny of Passeridae by Päckert et al (2021) didn't include Carpospiza brachydactyla.

We discussed this a few months ago on the 'Motacillidae' thread here: Motacillidae

I have the "largest avian radiation" lynx book bought and in transit, so hopefully this and much more will become clearer soon. 😁

 

[l_raty]

Here's an old thread with references and a tree by Laurent himself!

Petronia or Gymnoris

Hi, Wondering if someone knows what the ground is for classifying superciliaris, dentata, pyrgita and xanthocollis in the genus Gymnoris instead of Petronia? IOC, H&M and HBW all use Gymnoris, but Clements still have them in Petronia. Many thanks in advance! Markus

www.birdforum.net

Thanks.

So the refs on morphology are

• Иваницкий ВВ. [Ivanitskiy VV.] 1997. Воробьи и родственные им группы зерноядных птиц: поведение, экология, эволюция. [Sparrows and their allied groups of granivorous birds: behavour, ecology, evolution.] KMK Scientific Press, Москва [Moscow]. [djvu]
• Bock W. 2004. Affinities of Carpospiza brachydactyla (Passeriformes; Passeridae). J. Ornithol. 145: 223-226. [pdf]

Ivanitskiy discussed Carpospiza on pp. 126-128 of his book. I have attached a transcription of this part of the text, which can easily be copy-pasted in a translation program by anyone having problems with Russian (the djvu file in the link above is image-only). Bock went into more details about the tongue apparatus -- this was the main subject of his paper -- but Ivanitskiy was 7 years earlier. Bock did not cite Ivanitskiy.
(Of course neither Ivanitskiy nor Bock considered the possibility of a relationship to Motacillidae.)

 

[Markus Lagerqvist]

This is what Fjeldså et.al. says about Carpospiza:

"There is good evidence to suggest that Carpospiza brachydactyla of western Asia shares a common ancestor with Motacillidae (Oliveros et.al. 2019), suggesting an origin in the dry interior of Asia. Carpospiza is migratory like most motacillids and unlike most sparrows. We may speculate that early motacillids gradually abandoned the ancestral grain-eating habits and became insectivorous in response to the development of meadow and boggy habitats in the areas where the ancient Paratethys Sea was once located in the interior of western Asia, or on the barren mammoth steppe (Volker 1999a; Outlaw & Volker 2006a)."

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

This is what Fjeldså et.al. says about Carpospiza:

"There is good evidence to suggest that Carpospiza brachydactyla of western Asia shares a common ancestor with Motacillidae (Oliveros et.al. 2019), suggesting an origin in the dry interior of Asia. Carpospiza is migratory like most motacillids and unlike most sparrows. We may speculate that early motacillids gradually abandoned the ancestral grain-eating habits and became insectivorous in response to the development of meadow and boggy habitats in the areas where the ancient Paratethys Sea was once located in the interior of western Asia, or on the barren mammoth steppe (Volker 1999a; Outlaw & Volker 2006a)."

Thanks. Is there a figure accompanying this text?

 

[jts1882]

We discussed this a few months ago on the 'Motacillidae' thread here: Motacillidae

I have the "largest avian radiation" lynx book bought and in transit, so hopefully this and much more will become clearer soon. 😁

The review of the book linked in that thread seems fairly clear stating that the "Pale Rockfinch Carpospiza brachydactyla is also a member of the pipit family Motacillidae rather than a sparrow" as one of the surprising results of DNA analyses.

I've looked through the appendices of Oliveros et al (2010), Kuhl et al (2020) and Feng et al (2020) and can't find anything extra. The first two sample just only species each from 'Passeridae (Passer domesticus) and Motacillidae (Motacilla alba and M. flava, respectively). The Feng et al study also samples Hypocryptadius cinnamomeus and has it sister to Passer domesticus. No sign of Carpospiza brachydactyla, so perhaps its original research used for the book.

 

[DDonsker]

Thanks. Is there a figure accompanying this text?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Thank youuuu. We can note something else in this figure, the position of Amblyospiza in comparison to Ploceidae

 

[opisska]

Okay, so both "Thick-billed Pipit" and "Large-billed Pipit" are free if needed.

 

[l_raty]

Thanks, David.
So this is a tree computed from a supermatrix -- I assume the data that was used must then be described in their "Appendix 2", which they refer to in the figure caption ?
What did they use for Carpospiza ?
Did they produce new data, or did they simply use pre-existing data ? (I.e., was the data fundamentally augmented between the tree I computed 5 year ago and theirs ?)

 

[DDonsker]

Thanks, David.
This is a tree computed from a supermatrix -- I assume the data that were used must then be described in their "Appendix 2".
What did they use for Carpospiza ?
Did they produce new data, or did they simply use pre-existing data ?

Laurent,

Still can't find this data anywhere in Oliveros et al.

I just went straight to the source and have asked Jon Fjeldså himself to clarify. I'll post his response when I hear from him.

David