• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Thraupidae (1 Viewer)

Rosalyn M. Price‐Waldman, Allison J. Shultz & Kevin J. Burns. Speciation rates are correlated with changes in plumage color complexity in the largest family of songbirds. Evolution. First published:24 April 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.13982

Abstract:

Although evolutionary theory predicts an association between the evolution of elaborate ornamentation and speciation, empirical evidence for links between speciation and ornament evolution has been mixed. In birds, the evolution of increasingly complex and colorful plumage may promote speciation by introducing prezygotic mating barriers. However, overall changes in color complexity, including both increases and decreases, may also promote speciation by altering the sexual signals that mediate reproductive choices. Here, we examine the relationship between complex plumage and speciation rates in the largest family of songbirds, the tanagers (Thraupidae). First, we test whether species with more complex plumage coloration are associated with higher speciation rates and find no correlation. We then test whether rates of male or female plumage color complexity evolution are correlated with speciation rates. We find that elevated rates of plumage complexity evolution are associated with higher speciation rates, regardless of sex and whether species are evolving more complex or less complex ornamentation. These results extend to whole‐plumage color complexity and regions important in signaling (crown and throat) but not nonsignaling regions (back and wingtip). Our results suggest that the extent of change in plumage traits, rather than overall values of plumage complexity, may play a role in speciation.
 
Peter Kovalik said:
IOC Updates Diary May 16

Completely update and revise the sequence and taxonomy of Thraupidae.
Click to expand...

Fantastic, finally! Now they more or less only have Pellorneidae and Timaliidae revisions left of the families. peculiar they left them intact when rearranging the laughingthrushes.

Interesting that SACC still hasn't reached a total agreement after their proposal on the matter 3,5 years ago (the genus name of Mourning Sierra Finch for instance).
 
Last edited:
Seems they've missed Fulvous-crested and Tawny-crested Tanager, both not part of Tachyphonus according to Burns et al. SACC still haven't decided what to do, but that's not a problem for IOC concerning for instance Mourning Sierra Finch, which is also in limbo in the SACC-list.
 
Turbek, S.P., M. Browne, A.S. Di Giacomo, C. Kopuchian, W.M. Hochachka, C. Estalles, D.A. Lijtmaer, P.L. Tubaro, L.F. Silveira, I.J. Lovette, R.J. Safran, S.A. Taylor, and L. Campagna (2021)
Rapid speciation via the evolution of pre-mating isolation in the Iberá Seedeater
Science 371: eabc0256
doi: 10.1126/science.abc0256
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6536/eabc0256

Behavioral isolation can catalyze speciation and permit the slow accumulation of additional reproductive barriers between co-occurring organisms. We illustrate how this process occurs by examining the genomic and behavioral bases of pre-mating isolation between two bird species (Sporophila hypoxantha and the recently discovered S. iberaensis) that belong to the southern capuchino seedeaters, a recent, rapid radiation characterized by variation in male plumage coloration and song. Although these two species co-occur without obvious ecological barriers to reproduction, we document behaviors indicating species recognition by song and plumage traits and strong assortative mating associated with genomic regions underlying male plumage patterning. Plumage differentiation likely originated through the reassembly of standing genetic variation, indicating how novel sexual signals may quickly arise and maintain species boundaries.
 
Richard Klim said:
Burns et al

Burns, Shultz, Title, Mason, Barker, Klicka, Lanyon & Lovette (in press). Phylogenetics and diversification of tanagers (Passeriformes: Thraupidae), the largest radiation of Neotropical songbirds. Mol Phylogenet Evol. [abstract]

Subfamilies:
  1. Catamblyrhynchinae Ridgway, 1901 (Plushcap): Catamblyrhynchus
  2. Charitospizinae new subfamily (Coal-crested Finch): Charitospiza
  3. Orchesticinae new subfamily (grosbeak tanagers): Orchesticus, Parkerthraustes
  4. Nemosiinae Bonaparte, 1854 (flock-dwelling tanagers): Compsothraupis, Cyanicterus, Nemosia, Sericossypha
  5. Hemithraupinae Sundevall, 1872 (yellow-and-black tanagers): Chlorophanes, Chrysothlypis, Hemithraupis, Heterospingus, Iridophanes
  6. Porphyrospizinae new subfamily (yellow-billed tanagers): Incaspiza, Phrygilus alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti, Porphyrospiza
  7. Dacninae Sundevall, 1836 (blue tanagers): Cyanerpes, Dacnis, Tersina
  8. Saltatorinae Bonaparte, 1853 (saltators): Saltator (except S rufiventris), Saltatricula
  9. Emberizoidinae new subfamily (grassland tanagers): Coryphaspiza, Emberizoides, Embernagra
  10. Coerebinae d'Orbigny & Lafresnaye, 1838 (dome-nesting tanagers): Camarhynchus, Certhidea, Coereba, Euneornis, Geospiza, Loxigilla, Loxipasser, Melanospiza, Melopyrrha, Pinaroloxias, Platyspiza, Tiaris
  11. Tachyphoninae Bonaparte, 1853 (ornamented tanagers): Conothraupis, Coryphospingus, Creurgops, Eucometis, Lanio, Ramphocelus, Rhodospingus, Tachyphonus, Trichothraupis, Volatinia
  12. Sporophilinae Ridgway, 1901 (seedeaters): Dolospingus, Oryzoborus, Sporophila
  13. Poospizinae Wolters, 1980 (warbler tanagers): Cnemoscopus, Compsospiza, Cypsnagra, Donacospiza, Hemispingus, Nephelornis, Piezorina, Poospiza, Pyrrhocoma, Thlypopsis, Urothraupis, Xenospingus
  14. Diglossinae Sclater, 1875 (highland tanagers): Acanthidops, Catamenia, Conirostrum, Diglossa, Diuca speculifera, Haplospiza, Idiopsar, Melanodera, Nesospiza, Oreomanes, Phrygilus (except P alaudinus, P carbonarius, P fruticeti), Rowettia, Sicalis, Xenodacnis
  15. Thraupinae Cabanis, 1847 (core tanagers): Anisognathus, Bangsia, Buthraupis, Calochaetes, Chlorochrysa, Chlorornis, Cissopis, Cnemathraupis, Diuca diuca, Dubusia, Gubernatrix, Iridosornis, Lophospingus, Neothraupis, Paroaria, Pipraeidea, Saltator rufiventris, Schistochlamys, Stephanophorus, Tangara, Thraupis, Wetmorethraupis
Suggested possible changes to genera...

Porphyrospizinae:
  • Phrygilus alaudinus, P carbonarius > Corydospiza Sundevall, 1872
  • Phrygilus fruticeti > Rhopospina Cabanis, 1851
Saltatorinae:
  • Saltatricula > Saltator
Coerebinae:
  • Certhidea fusca > new genus ?
  • Loxigilla portoricensis, L violacea > Melopyrrha
  • Tiaris bicolor > Melanospiza
  • Tiaris canorus > Phonipara Gray, 1850
  • Tiaris fuliginosa, T obscurus > new genus
Tachyphoninae:
  • Tachyphonus cristatus, T luctuosus, T rufiventer > new genus
  • Tachyphonus delatrii > new genus
  • Tachyphonus surinamus > new genus
Sporophilinae:
  • Dolospingus, Oryzoborus > Sporophila
Poospizinae:
  • Hemispingus atropileus, H calophrys, H parodii, H reyi > new genus
  • Hemispingus frontalis, H melanotis > Sphenops Sclater, 1862
  • Hemispingus goeringi, H rufosuperciliaris > Orospingus Riley, 1922
  • Hemispingus verticalis, H xanthophthalmus > Pseudospingus Berlepsch & Stolzmann, 1896
  • Hemispingus superciliaris, Pyrrhocoma > Thlypopsis
  • Hemispingus trifasciatus, Poospiza alticola, P cabanisi, P cinerea, P erythrophrys, P lateralis, P melanoleuca, P torquata > Microspingus Taczanowski, 1874
  • Poospiza caesar, P hypochondria > Poospizopsis Berlepsch, 1893
  • Poospiza hispaniolensis > new genus
  • Poospiza rubecula > new genus
  • Poospiza thoracica > new genus
Diglossinae:
  • Haplospiza rustica > Spodiornis Sclater, 1866
  • Idiopsar, Phrygilus dorsalis, P erythronotus > Diuca
  • Oreomanes > Conirostrum
  • Phrygilus plebejus, P unicolor > Geospizopsis Bonaparte, 1856
Thraupinae:
  • Buthraupis wetmorei > Tephrophilus Moore, 1934
  • Diuca diuca > Hedyglossa Reichenbach, 1851
  • Saltator rufiventris > Dubusia or new genus
  • Tangara ornata > T argentea Lafresnaye, 1943
  • Thraupis abbas, T cyanoptera, T episcopus, T glaucocolpa, T ornata, T palmarum, T sayaca > Tangara
  • Thraupis cyanocephala > Sporathraupis Ridgway, 1898
Click to expand...
I reread the paper and I have the impression that something is wrong or curious. It's odd but in their figures, the time of divergence seems badly evaluated. The lineages of some genera look so young, they seem to have diverged very recently (3 mya, 4 mya...). Recent taxonomic revision don't really match. I would drastically reduce the number of genera in Thraupidae and Icteridae
 
Last edited:
I believe Kevin Burns and colleagues don't use divergence dating to assess generic distinctions for classification changes, but rather what is the revision that is most conservative and will result in the fewest number of changes while still creating monophyletic, morphologically consistent genera.

Strictly calibrating taxonomy to age of divergence is a fool's errand, as a universal measure of genetic distinctiveness doesn't really exist.
 
Mysticete said:
I believe Kevin Burns and colleagues don't use divergence dating to assess generic distinctions for classification changes, but rather what is the revision that is most conservative and will result in the fewest number of changes while still creating monophyletic, morphologically consistent genera.

Strictly calibrating taxonomy to age of divergence is a fool's errand, as a universal measure of genetic distinctiveness doesn't really exist.
Click to expand...

Clearly, this is a subject I should discuss with him because it intrigues me. However I noticed one thing, in all the phylogenetic studies that I have read on birds, whatever the family or the order, the average divergence time was always between 9 - 10 mya if not slightly more (15 mya) but rarely or almost never 3-4 mya, that is what I observe for mammals.
 
Nine-primaried Oscines are really young... If you take the same divergence time as other families, you'd end up merging all those bunting, american orioles & warblers & tanagers in one family. They really evolved that fast. That would give like 8% of all birds in one family.
So I guess it's not very surprising to see genera that are much younger then usual in this group.
 
TomDerutter said:
Nine-primaried Oscines are really young... If you take the same divergence time as other families, you'd end up merging all those bunting, american orioles & warblers & tanagers in one family. They really evolved that fast. That would give like 8% of all birds in one family.
So I guess it's not very surprising to see genera that are much younger then usual in this group.
Click to expand...
Rather 5 families. The very silly example is the lineage composed by Nesospiza, Rowettia and Melanodera which has the same age as the closely related Phrygilus clade 🧐
 
Jim LeNomenclatoriste said:
Clearly, this is a subject I should discuss with him because it intrigues me. However I noticed one thing, in all the phylogenetic studies that I have read on birds, whatever the family or the order, the average divergence time was always between 9 - 10 mya if not slightly more (15 mya) but rarely or almost never 3-4 mya, that is what I observe for mammals.
Click to expand...
This consistent date doesn't seem quite right to me. Some older clades have very deep intrafamily divisions...IIRC, their are fairly old divergences between the three kingfisher or trogon subfamilies, on par with the age of other family level splits.
 
Mysticete said:
This consistent date doesn't seem quite right to me. Some older clades have very deep intrafamily divisions...IIRC, their are fairly old divergences between the three kingfisher or trogon subfamilies, on par with the age of other family level splits.
Click to expand...

Jim LeNomenclatoriste said:
Clearly, this is a subject I should discuss with him because it intrigues me. However I noticed one thing, in all the phylogenetic studies that I have read on birds, whatever the family or the order, the average divergence time was always between 9 - 10 mya if not slightly more (15 mya) but rarely or almost never 3-4 mya, that is what I observe for mammals.
Click to expand...
I should have specified that I was talking about divergence time at generic level, not family level 🙄🙄🙄
 

Similar threads

Peter Kovalik
Back in black: melanin-rich skin colour
Replies
0
Views
564
Peter Kovalik
Peter Kovalik
Fred Ruhe
A juvenile bird with possible crown-group affinities from a dinosaur-rich Cretaceous ecosystem in North America
Replies
1
Views
422
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Genomes, fossils, and the concurrent rise of modern birds and flowering plants in the Late Cretaceous
Replies
5
Views
596
THE_FERN
T
Fred Ruhe
Phylogenetic biome conservatism as a key concept for an integrative understanding of evolutionary history: Galliformes and Falconiformes as study case
Replies
0
Views
298
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe
Fossil evidence sheds light on sexual selection during the early evolution of birds
Replies
1
Views
437
Fred Ruhe
Fred Ruhe

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top