My taxonomic predictions (1 Viewer)

[Mysticete]

I can't find them now sadly. I think it was mentioned in passing in a proposal for a taxonomic change in a non-cuckoo group of birds.

 

[Mysticete]

My classification for Caprimulgiformes. I am a bit more radical with this group than most, recognizing 4 subfamilies, and 4 tribes within Caprimulginae. Unfortunately, and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, there are not formerly named family/subfamily/tribes for several of these clades, which I have put in " ".

Caprimulgiformes

Caprimulgidae
Eurostopodinae
Eurostopodus

"Lyncorninae"
Lyncornis

"Gactorninae"
Gactornis

Caprimulginae
Nyctidromini
Nyctiprogne, Lurocalis, Nyctipolus, Nyctidromus, Tepuiornis, Uropsalis, Quechuavis, Setopagis, Eleothreptus, Systellura, Hydropsalis

"Antrostomini"
Siphonorhis, Nyctiphrynus, Phalaenoptilus, Antrostomus

Chordeilini
Podager, Chordeiles

Caprimulgini
Veles, Caprimulgus

 

[l_raty]

Unfortunately, and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, there are not formerly named family/subfamily/tribes for several of these clades, which I have put in " ".

Pretty sure no family-group name was proposed for the recent Gactornis, and I have no trace of a name based on Lyncornis either. I would make these name Gactornithinae and Lyncornithinae, though, as they end in a transliteration of ὄρνις, -ιθος, a bird in Greek.
I would attribute Antrostomini (which I had overlooked so far, too -- despite having checked this journal for family-group names previously) to Shufeldt 1889.

 

[Mysticete]

The remaining nocturnal Strisores

Steatornithiformes
Steatornithidae
Steatornis

Nyctibiiformes
Nyctibiidae
Phyllaemulor, Nyctibius

Podargiformes
Podargidae
"Rigidipenninae"
Rigidipenna

Podarginae
Podargus

Batrachostominae
Batrachostomus

Aegothelidae
Aegotheles

 

[Acanthis]

I'd be a bit cautious about it.
First, this is based only on a cyt-b sequence -- this is the only gene that has been sequenced for Columba larvata.
Second, there are five cyt-b sequences for this species in GenBank (4 from Valente et al 2020, and a shorter one from Wilson et al 2022). Four of these are very similar to one another, while the fifth one is rather (~5%) divergent (and has quite a few unidentified nucleotides) -- this sequence might conceivably be problematic. Unfortunately, this divergent sequence is also the longest of the five, and is the one that Oliver et al 2023 chose to use in their supermatrix.

That's a pity.
The possibility of a relationship between the three Columba (subgenus Turturoena) species and the more terrestrial  larvata was intriguing.

 

[Acanthis]

I finally am nearing completion of Columbiformes for my checklist. Ultimately, I stuck to subfamilies for now rather than elevating some to family status. This is mostly because I observed enough variation in molecular clock data that I am not convinced we have a firm grasp of how far back some of them diverged. Hell I am not sure we actually know for certain what is going on with the Australasian species on the basic relationship level

My listing isn't particularly controversial...I think folks have been pretty good at fixing the most glaring issues. If you have comments or thoughts or things you think should be subdivided more/differently, let me know! FYI green text is not yet accepted by IOC and red text is extinct

Columbidae
Claravinae
Claravis, Uropelia, Paraclavis, Metropelia, Columbina

Columbinae
Zenaidini
Geotrygon, Leptotrygon, Leptoptila, Zentrygon, Zenaida

Columbini
Ectopistes, Reinwardtoena, Turacoena, Macropygia, Patagioenas, Streptopelia, Nesoenas, Spilopelia, Columba

Starnoenadinae
Starnoenas

Phabinae
Diopezus, "Gallicolumba" rufigula, Gallicolumba, Geopelia, Henicophaps, Ocyphaps, Leucosarcia, Petrophassa, Geophaps, Phaps, Pampusana

Raphinae
Treronini
Treron

Chalcophabini
Chalcophaps, Oena, Turtur

Otidiphabinae
Microgoura, Trugon, Otidiphaps

Raphini
Pezophaps, Raphus, Caloenas, Bountyphaps

Gourini
Didunculus, Goura, Natunaornis

Phapitreronini
Phapitreron

Ptilinopini
Hemiphaga, Gymnophaps, Lopholaimus, Cryptophaps, Ducula, Tongoenas, Megaloprepia, Ramphiculus, Alectroenas, Drepanoptila, Chrysoena, Ptilinopus

My list is very similar, the main difference being the restriction of Raphinae to the diverse collection of unique old oddball lineages, and the consequent raising of Treroni- and Ptilinopi- to subfamily level. I haven't decided what to do with Phapitreroni- yet.

 

[Acanthis]

Oligo-Miocene radiation within South-west Pacific arc terranes underpinned repeated upstream continental dispersals in pigeons (Columbiformes)

Abstract. Upstream colonizations from islands to continents have played an important role in two major global bird radiations: the oscine passerines and th

academic.oup.com

If the Ptilinopinae part the tree (Fig. S4) in this paper is accurate then the relationship between Chrysoena and Ptilinopus melanospilus suggests using Haemataena for melanospilus might be a better option.

Also Ptilinopus nainus appears to be closer to Drepanoptila holosericea than other members of its genus. It seems a bit distant to be easily included in Drepanoptila and I don't know if another genus name is available.

 

[Mysticete]

Also Ptilinopus nainus appears to be closer to Drepanoptila holosericea than other members of its genus. It seems a bit distant to be easily included in Drepanoptila and I don't know if another genus name is available.

Chrysoena?

 

[Acanthis]

Chrysoena?

This seems to apply just to three Fijian endemics though another paper ( https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790313003412 ) does place Drepanoptila and nainus close to Chrysoena, whereas in this one they are closer to Alectroenas. They're all pretty distinct anyway.

 

[Mysticete]

After months of having no time, I have finally wrapped up my first draft of Strisores. Rather than run down all of the taxonomy, here is the link to my in_progress taxonomy. Comments and thoughts only welcome

P.S. I know I will need to move Gruiformes and Charadriiformes to early in the list thanks to the new paper that reorders families, but it's easier to add them to the end of the file and then move them over once finished

Tetrapod Checklist.xlsx

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[jts1882]

I can't help note you always use subfamilies, even when they are the sole one.

P.S. Hoatzin and Pink-spotted Fruit-dove are LC, as are the four Hemiprocne treeswifts.

 

[Mysticete]

That's just for consistency sake so the column has something in it.

Probably just forgot to add the LC in for those since I do families one a time and they are tiny families

 

[Mysticete]

After spending months on Apodiformes, thanks to the semester being over I have managed to speed run through Gruiformes: My take on the classification

Gruiformes
Psophiidae
Psophia

Aramidae
Aramus

Gruidae
Balearicinae - Balearica
Gruinae - Leucogeranus, Antigone, Bugeranus, Anthropoides, Grus

Heliornithidae
Podica, Heliopais, Heliornis

Aptornithidae
Aptornis

Nesotrochidae
Nesotrochis

Sarothruridae
"Mentocrecinae" - Mentocrex (I assume this doesn't have an existing family level name in the lit?
Sarothrurinae - Rallicula, Sarothrura

Rallidae
Himantornithinae
Himantornithini - Himantornis
Gymnocrecini - Gymnocrex

Pardirallinae
Anuralimnas, Mustelirallus, Neocrex, Cyanolimnas, Pardirallus, Amaurolimnas, Aramides

Rallinae
"Canirallini" - Canirallus
Rallini - Rallus
Ocydromini - Crecopsis, Rougetius, Aramidopsis, Dryolimnas, Biensis, Crex, Lewinia, Habroptila, Diaphorapteryx, Erythromachus, Aptenorallus, Eulabeornis, Gallirallus, Aphanopteryx, Habropteryx, Hypotaenidia, Vitirallus

Fulicinae
Porzanini - Porzana
Fulicini - Pareudiastes, Porphyriops, Tribonyx, Pyramida, Paragallinula, Gallinula, Fulica

Porphyrioninae
Aphanocrex, Porphyrula, Porphyrio,

Zaporninae
Laterallini - "Laterallus", Rufirallus, Coturnicops, Creciscus, Hapalocrex, Laterallus
Amauronithini - Poliolimnas, Megacrex, Aenigmatolimnas, Gallicrex, Amaurornis
Zapornini - Rallina, Zapornia

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Should I use Fringalauda Hodgson, 1836, or Fringilauda Hodgson, 1844, which is considered an emendation?

 

[Mike Earp]

Should I use Fringalauda Hodgson, 1836, or Fringilauda Hodgson, 1844, which is considered an emendation?

If the emendation is valid, wouldn't it be Fringilauda Hodgson, 1836?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

If the emendation is valid, wouldn't it be Fringilauda Hodgson, 1836?

I don't know, Richmond Index says 1844

 

[Mike Earp]

I don't know, Richmond Index says 1844

Original name used (in Asiat. Researches [i.e. Asiatic Researches; or, Transactions of the Society instituted in Bengal, for enquiring into the history, the antiquities, the arts and sciences, and literature of Asia], 19 (1), 158) was Fringalanda. This was apparently emended in errata to Fringalauda. So subsequent emendation to Fringilauda seems to be unwarranted. Even if it was warranted, I think the name would retain the original authorship and date.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Original name used (in Asiat. Researches, 19 (1), 158) was Fringalanda. This was apparently emended in errata to Fringalauda. So subsequent emendation to Fringilauda seems to be unwarranted. Even if it was warranted, I think the name would retain the original authorship and date.

I don't see what made him change Fringalauda to Fringilauda. Maybe he wanted to keep the root Fringil-

 

[Mike Earp]

I don't see what made him change Fringalauda to Fringilauda. Maybe he wanted to keep the root Fringil-

The "he" here is E. Blyth, not Hodgson. He seemed to be unaware of the author's earlier emendation as he says "Spelt Fringalanda in the original, evidently a mistake."

 

[l_raty]

Fringalanda Hodgson 1836 : v.19 1836 - Asiatic researches, or, Transactions of the Society instituted in Bengal for inquiring into the history and antiquities, the arts, sciences and literature of Asia - Biodiversity Heritage Library
= the actual OS.

Fringalauda Hodgson 1836 : v.19 1836 - Asiatic researches, or, Transactions of the Society instituted in Bengal for inquiring into the history and antiquities, the arts, sciences and literature of Asia - Biodiversity Heritage Library
= a justified emendation, and the correct spelling (the change was made in an erratum which is included in the same journal volume as the OD; this is to be treated as evidence of an inadvertent error in the OD, which must be corrected; Fringalauda retains the original authorship and date of 'Fringalanda', which is therefore an incorrect OS).

Fringilauda Hodgson 1844 : The zoological miscellany - Biodiversity Heritage Library
= an incorrect subsequent spelling (the change was made without any comment or indication that it was intentional).
(This spelling may conceivably have been used in a way that would be demonstrably intentional elsewhere, though.)

Fringillauda Blyth '1844' (= 1845) : v.13:pt.2=no.151-156 (1844) - Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal - Biodiversity Heritage Library
= an unjustified emendation (the change was accompanied with a statement that the OS was incorrect; the change was clearly intentional).

Fringillalauda Salvin 1882 : A catalogue of the collection of birds formed by the late Hugh Edwin Strickland - Biodiversity Heritage Library
= another unjustified emendation (the modified spelling was twice adopted as valid, the (correct) OS was twice cited in synonymy; the change was clearly intentional).


You should use Fringalauda (unless one of the later spelling is demonstrably in prevailing usage).