• 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.

Parrots (1 Viewer)

James Jobling

Well-known member
Le N.
Many thanks for your quick reply (if you send me a private post with your given name, I shall be happy to acknowledge this contribution - and in the future). If you have access to the paper, can you tell me the type of Saudareos (in the list I use ornata, flavoviridis, and johnstoniae are in Trichoglossus, but iris is in Psitteuteles).
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
Let's face it, Saudareos is a horrible name. Personally I would have preferred a name like Ptilopsittacus, emphasizing their feather-shaped tongue shared by many genera
 
Last edited:

andrew147

Well-known member
Le N.
Many thanks for your quick reply (if you send me a private post with your given name, I shall be happy to acknowledge this contribution - and in the future). If you have access to the paper, can you tell me the type of Saudareos (in the list I use ornata, flavoviridis, and johnstoniae are in Trichoglossus, but iris is in Psitteuteles).

They designate ornatus as the type species of Saudareos.
 

James Eaton

Trent Valley Crew
This is a really fascinating paper, so much to take in. The three taxonomic rearrangements for Indonesian taxa that I'm most interested in I noticed the following:

flavotectus (Wetar race of Marigold Lorikeet) more closely related to weberi (Leaf/Flores Lorikeet), than those it is currently placed with (capistratus and fortis) in current taxonomic arrangements, though does make sense when looking at plumage. No taxonomic authority had previously picked up on that.

meyeri and flavoviridis (Sulawesi & Sula) should be considered separate species, given meyeri is more closely related to the sympatric ornata (this is one that Birdlife and Indonesian Archipelago field guide already split).

It's a shame riciniata wasn't included in the study to compare with squamata and obiensis, as this is a likely split.

James
 
Last edited:

pbjosh

missing the neotropics
Switzerland
Proposal 873 to SACC

Modify species limits in Forpus: (A) Treat Forpus crassirostris as a separate species from F. xanthopterygius, and (B) Treat Forpus spengeli as a separate species from F. passerinus
 

njlarsen

Gallery Moderator
Opus Editor
Supporter
Barbados
Pamela Rasmussen has been busy writing proposals! I think that was no 2 or 3 during the last two days :t:

Niels
 

thomasdonegan

Former amateur ornithologist
Proposal 873 to SACC

Modify species limits in Forpus: (A) Treat Forpus crassirostris as a separate species from F. xanthopterygius, and (B) Treat Forpus spengeli as a separate species from F. passerinus

It's worth looking at some of the comments on part (B) this proposal.

Green-rumped Parakeet F passerinus and Turquoise-winged Parakeet F spengeli are morphologically very different. In males, one has a bright green rump and one has a bright blue rump, but that is just the start of what amount to multiple strong morphological differences. Genetically, however, they are embedded in the same part of the relevant tree.

Here we have one vote in favour of a split from an ornithologist who knows the on-the-ground- situation in Colombia and the specimens in his museum well, concluding a split is best. I would agree with the conclusion. However, he states that the molecular data are consistent with a split, which is incorrect.

We also have two votes from those who looked closer at the molecular data, saying that the plumage differentiation is totally normal for the same species. This is poppycock. I know not of any parrot species which shows anything approaching this extraordinary level of morphological variation within a species - and certainly nothing in the genus Forpus does.

Rather than deciding whether to give priority to molecular trees or morphological studies when they conflict, which happens sometimes as here, 3 committee members prefer to mis-state the facts (on both sides) to suit the conclusions. This is the opposite of how the scientific method is supposed to work.

IOC and BirdLife split these already. I hope they will not change their views based upon this not very informative discussion...
 
Last edited:

Peter Kovalik

Well-known member
Slovakia
Psittacula cyanocephala

Prateek Dey, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Indrani Sarkar, Swapna Devi Ray, Padmnabhan Pramod, Venkata Hanumat Sastry Kochiganti, Goldin Quadros, Renu Singh, Ram Pratap Singh. Complete mitogenome of endemic Plum-headed parakeet Psittacula cyanocephala – characterization and phylogenetic analysis. bioRxiv Posted October 09, 2020.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.09.332866

Abstract:

Psittacula cyanocephala is a parakeet endemic to the Indian sub-continent, widespread in the illegal bird trade. Previous studies on Psittacula parakeets have highlighted taxonomic ambiguities, warranting further studies to resolve such issues. Since the mitochondrial genome provides useful information about a species concerning its evolution and phylogenetics, we sequenced the complete mitogenome of P. cyanocephala using NGS, validated 38.86% of the mitogenome using Sanger Sequencing and compared it with other available whole mitogenomes of Psittacula. The complete mitogenome of the species was 16814 bp in length with 54.08% AT composition. P. cyanocephala mitogenome comprises of 13 protein-coding genes, 2 rRNAs and 22 tRNAs. P. cyanocephala mitogenome organization was consistent with other Psittacula mitogenomes. Comparative codon usage analysis indicated the role of natural selection on Psittacula mitogenomes. Strong purifying selection pressure was observed maximum on nad1 and nad4l genes. The mitochondrial control region of all Psittacula species displayed the ancestral avian CR gene order. Phylogenetic analyses revealed the Psittacula genus as paraphyletic nature, containing at least 4 groups of species within the same genus, suggesting its taxonomic reconsideration. Our results provide useful information for developing forensic tests to control the illegal trade of the species, scientific basis for phylogenetic revision of genus Psittacula.
 

Jim LeNomenclatoriste

Taxonomy and zoological nomenclature
France
Prateek Dey, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Indrani Sarkar, Swapna Devi Ray, Padmnabhan Pramod, Venkata Hanumat Sastry Kochiganti, Goldin Quadros, Renu Singh, Ram Pratap Singh. Complete mitogenome of endemic Plum-headed parakeet Psittacula cyanocephala – characterization and phylogenetic analysis. bioRxiv Posted October 09, 2020.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.09.332866

Abstract:

Psittacula cyanocephala is a parakeet endemic to the Indian sub-continent, widespread in the illegal bird trade. Previous studies on Psittacula parakeets have highlighted taxonomic ambiguities, warranting further studies to resolve such issues. Since the mitochondrial genome provides useful information about a species concerning its evolution and phylogenetics, we sequenced the complete mitogenome of P. cyanocephala using NGS, validated 38.86% of the mitogenome using Sanger Sequencing and compared it with other available whole mitogenomes of Psittacula. The complete mitogenome of the species was 16814 bp in length with 54.08% AT composition. P. cyanocephala mitogenome comprises of 13 protein-coding genes, 2 rRNAs and 22 tRNAs. P. cyanocephala mitogenome organization was consistent with other Psittacula mitogenomes. Comparative codon usage analysis indicated the role of natural selection on Psittacula mitogenomes. Strong purifying selection pressure was observed maximum on nad1 and nad4l genes. The mitochondrial control region of all Psittacula species displayed the ancestral avian CR gene order. Phylogenetic analyses revealed the Psittacula genus as paraphyletic nature, containing at least 4 groups of species within the same genus, suggesting its taxonomic reconsideration. Our results provide useful information for developing forensic tests to control the illegal trade of the species, scientific basis for phylogenetic revision of genus Psittacula.


In which section did you find this paper, I can't find it in the section "zoology" ?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top