Peter Boesman
Well-known member
See also vocal analysis: Birds of the World
Splitting in the 'Intermediate Egret complex' and not splitting in the 'Great Egret complex' seems inconsistent indeed...
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Taxonomy in-flux updates (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mysticete
- Start date
Splitting in the 'Intermediate Egret complex' and not splitting in the 'Great Egret complex' seems inconsistent indeed...
Mysticete
Well-known member
February 20
South American Snipe: I needed to make an adjustment to the TiF list because of my trip to Tierra del Fuego in late January. Specifically, I recognized the SACC split of South American Snipe, Gallinago paraguaiae into Pantanal Snipe, Gallinago paraguaiae and Magellanic Snipe, Gallinago magellanica (which I saw). See Miller et al. (2019) and SACC Proposal #843.
[Scolopacidae, Charadriiformes, Gruae II, 3.07]
Mysticete
Well-known member
February 25
Tinamous: The new arrangement of the Tinamidae follows Figure 2 of Musher et al. (2024). The current species tree marks the species with new DNA data using bright red asterisks. Only one species was not sampled, the Slaty-breasted Tinamou, Tinamus boucardi. Its placement reflects hybridization in Honduras with the Thicket Tinamou, Tinamus cinnamomeus (Monroe, 1968).
Besides reordering the tinamous, the Musher et al. tree suggests that the Andean Tinamou, Nothoprocta pentlandii, represents two non-sister species. In Birds of the High Andes, Fjeldså and Krabbe (1990) noted that the Andean Tinamou consists of a brownish group of subspecies and a grayish group. Accordingly, I've split the Andean Tinamou, Nothoprocta pentlandii, into two species:
- Brown Andean Tinamou, Nothoprocta oustaleti, containing subspecies fulvescens, oustaleti, niethammeri, and ambiguua and
- Gray Andean Tinamou, Nothoprocta pentlandii, containing the remaining subspecies: pentlandii, patriciae, doeringi, and mendozae.
[Tinamiformes, Palaeognathae: Ratites and Tinamous, 3.04]
Neomorphus
Active member
Absolutely!!! These two groups have been confused for so long, yet vocally sound so different that it should have been realized long ago. Furthermore, the Northern group looks more like a small N. ornata for starters which has been the source of more confusion.
Using Brown AT and Gray AT is absolutely pointless though and will help no-one. In Spanish the word pardo means brown or gray for example, so go figure how confusing these two words can be in so many Neotropical birds. Northern AT and Southern AT would work as placemarkers before anyone can come up with better names.
I thought the same, not to mention the fact that there already are Brown and Gray Tinamous, and that they both occur widely in the Andean foothills, if not at high elevations. Northern and Southern would be better I guess, although they might wrongly imply a sister relationship to people who don't pay attention to hyphens, or the lack thereof.
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
Yeah those names are pretty terrible. At first glance Andean should be retired as a name as they aren’t sisters apparently and both are common and frequently encountered. Which is a shame as Andean Tinamou is a good name in a family of hard to name birds.
Perhaps one can become Montane Tinamou and one can become Alpine Tinamou or something along those lines.
Perhaps one can become Montane Tinamou and one can become Alpine Tinamou or something along those lines.
Mysticete
Well-known member
I wouldn't take what common names are or are not used too seriously. This is a one-man project, and he probably just needed a place-holder name and should the split happen will happily go with whatever SACC or IOC decide to use.
Hell, it's not like whole committees of people haven't come up with worse names!
Hell, it's not like whole committees of people haven't come up with worse names!
I think Huayco Tinamou references the bird's vocalizations, though as far as I can tell it's the only tinamou name that's based on voice.
Jacana
Will Jones
I didn't know that, I'd just assumed it was a place. It looks very "Quechua". A quick Googling suggests that it's a general name for tinamous in Quechuan.
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
While they are distinguishable on voice it’s not that different, they both give short dipthong-y up-slurred whistles. Northern birds have almost more of a stutter / delineation at the start. I can see why this split was overlooked by so many for so long.
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
April 2024
April 5
Bird Orders I'm adopting the new Stiller et al. (2024) phylogeny of the bird orders. I had been planning to switch to Kuhl et al. (2021), but changed my mind after Stiller et al. appeared. Both seem to have broken though the polytomy that had left the modern avian tree of life in a state of confusion. Mirarab et al. (2024) explains that the problem wasn't just incomplete lineage sorting.
There are some differences between the two trees, but at at ordinal level, most of those involve branches where the support is a little soft (i.e., less than 100%). I think these papers (and the companion piece Mirarab et al.) have taken a big step forward. I don't have much reason to prefer one over the other, but I had choose one, and figured I'd rather bet on Stiller et al.
I've kept the same 47 orders that represent most of the avian lineages that became separate by the very early Eocene. (Yes, I know I left out the Odontopterygiformes.) In fact, most of these lineages were already distinct in the Paleocene, and a few, perhaps only 3, survived the rock that crashed into the Yucatan near Chicxulub about 66.8 million years ago, killing the dinosaurs (except a few bird lineages) and many other organisms.
It will take a while to put in all the changes into effect, especially those below the ordinal level. As a teaser, I give you two pdfs, both for Stiller and Kuhl, à la TiF.
Click here for the Stiller tree
Click here for the Kuhl tree.
Both phylogenies use TiF orders (unlike the papers). The red stars on the Stiller tree indicate places where the two trees differ and the numbers are the number of species in each order.
April 5
Bird Orders I'm adopting the new Stiller et al. (2024) phylogeny of the bird orders. I had been planning to switch to Kuhl et al. (2021), but changed my mind after Stiller et al. appeared. Both seem to have broken though the polytomy that had left the modern avian tree of life in a state of confusion. Mirarab et al. (2024) explains that the problem wasn't just incomplete lineage sorting.
There are some differences between the two trees, but at at ordinal level, most of those involve branches where the support is a little soft (i.e., less than 100%). I think these papers (and the companion piece Mirarab et al.) have taken a big step forward. I don't have much reason to prefer one over the other, but I had choose one, and figured I'd rather bet on Stiller et al.
I've kept the same 47 orders that represent most of the avian lineages that became separate by the very early Eocene. (Yes, I know I left out the Odontopterygiformes.) In fact, most of these lineages were already distinct in the Paleocene, and a few, perhaps only 3, survived the rock that crashed into the Yucatan near Chicxulub about 66.8 million years ago, killing the dinosaurs (except a few bird lineages) and many other organisms.
It will take a while to put in all the changes into effect, especially those below the ordinal level. As a teaser, I give you two pdfs, both for Stiller and Kuhl, à la TiF.
Click here for the Stiller tree
Click here for the Kuhl tree.
Both phylogenies use TiF orders (unlike the papers). The red stars on the Stiller tree indicate places where the two trees differ and the numbers are the number of species in each order.
He's redefined Columbea as Kuhl's Lower Landbird clade (i.e. Gruimorphae, Strisores, Columbaves).
Comparing the two trees there are only two main differences in the higher taxa. Columbaves branches after Mirandornithes in Stiller rather than being grouped with Strisores and Gruimorphae in Kuhl and Ardeae is grafted onto the clade with Gruimorphae and Strsores in Stiller, rather than being sister to Telluraves.
The other ordinal differences are Opisthocomiformes as sister to Gruimorphae in Stiller (as Jarvis et al 2014) rather than sister to Strisores and the small shifts in positions of Rheiformes, Cuculiformes and Strigiformes.
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Each study gives different results. When you don't know anything about it, it's difficult to know which relationship gives the strongest support
In your blog these two bits of text are links to the PDFs; the links haven't copied into the text as reproduced here.
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Was one species among these four chosen as the type species?
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Because we must based on this description (below) and not that of the supplement which are species that he added in his genus Gobemouche
t.2 (1760) - Ornithologie, ou, Méthode contenant la division des oiseaux en ordres, sections, genres, especes & leurs variétés - Biodiversity Heritage Library
The Biodiversity Heritage Library works collaboratively to make biodiversity literature openly available to the world as part of a global biodiversity community.
l_raty
laurent raty
No. (So far as I know.)
No, in the Code, a genus is supposed to be based on its type species, not on any description. And its type species must be one of the nominal species cited by an available name and included in it, either in the OD or, if there are no such nominal species in the OD, in the first subsequent work where such nominal species can be found.
In vol 1-4, Brisson cited no available names (his references to Systema naturae were all to the 6th ed,where Linnaeus was not binominal yet), thus nothing there is eligible to be the type of his genera. In vol 5-6, including the supplement, he cited available names from the 10th ed of Systema naturae in the synonymy of his own unavailable names. In the supplement, he added such names to the synonymy of species he had treated in vol 1-4.
Jim LeNomenclatoriste
Je suis un mignon petit Traquet rubicole
Give me a valid genus name created by Brisson which contains a type species in his work? I don't think I know any of them
