Time calibration and Linnean ranks in birds (1 Viewer)

[andrew147]

I've come across "Tundra Plovers" somewhere as a nice alternative to "Golden-Plovers"
Can't remember where🤔

I've also seen 'spangled plovers'.

 

[Mysticete]

Okay....Now...let try the Oligocene as a family bench mark!

The Oligocene is a time period between the Eocene and the start of the "modern era", which begins in the Miocene. During this time period you see a lot of more archaic fauna go extinct as the "modern" fauna becomes established. It was a period of major global change: Antarctica became isolated and you see the first Southern Hemisphere glaciation, and the formation of a circumpolar current, which causes oceanic productivity to greatly increase. On land, climate cooled and became more arid; the vast forests of the Eocene began to break up and be replaced by brushland and more deciduous vegetation. Animals started to become adapted for these more open habitats. Between that and diversification of rodents, it's should not be a surprised this period saw a major burst in diversification for avian predators. SO...it makes sense to set this as a benchmark. A hard Oligocene benchmark would count any lineage that evolved at or prior to the Oligocene-Miocene transition (including the earlier mentioned Eocene aged splits), and would lump anything younger than the start of the Miocene. A soft approach could also be done here, and use the cut off as a minimum age: anything postdating this period would be lumped, which would sort of set a specific interval of time for "family level taxa", namely that they had to have evolved during the Eocene or Oligocene to "count".

Unsurprisingly, the younger age creates a massive explosion in non-passeriformes families, but a decrease in songbirds, although IMHO a reasonable decrease. I'm not going to give the full list here for space reason, but will highlight key interesting things; for the most part you can assume if something is split than it is a pre-existing family. Also the net+ numbers include the Eocene splits, so I am not discounting those

I'll do the counts in the next post just to prevent this from becoming too long.

 

[Mysticete]

Tinamiformes: net +3, with both modern subfamilies recognized and split into four families total.

Anseriformes: net +5; mostly subfamilies, although a few have poor representation in studies, so it might be really +3

Galliformes: One of the bigger boosts: net +11, including split of the Stone Partridges of Africa from the New World Quail. The rest are from the Phasianidae, which sees many tribes raised to full family status

Columbiformes: Another biggie! Net +13! All of the subfamilies and most of the tribes

Musophagiformes: net +2

Cuculiformes: net +2

Caprimulgiformes: Net +3; these are the same families split by TiF

Podargiformes: Net +2, raising Asian and Solomons Frogmouths to family status

Apodiformes: Net +1, with Cypseloididae raised to Family status. This family might be paraphyletic, so that might mean 2 families?

Gruiformes: Net +5; Rails split into 5 families

Charadriiformes: The same families from the Eocene are lumped, but 18 more families are split, with a net +15.

Plataleiformes: +1 families

Pelecaniformes: +2 at least, with probably Tigriornithidae and Cochleariidae likely splits.

Accipitriformes: The biggest change! net +20, especially amongst early diverging lineages

Strigiformes: +3 likely

Bucerotiformes: +2 probably

Galbuliformes: +2, including splitting off Nunlets

Piciformes: +1, New world toucans and barbets get lumped, but woodpecker subfamilies are elevated

Falconiformes: +2

Psittaciformes: +13! with many subfamilies and tribes elevated

Suboscines: +7 surprisingly. These include Ptilochloridae, Pipritidae, Platyrinchidae, Tachurididae, Grallariidae, Scytalopodidae, and Chamaezidae

Oscines: -29, but 3 additions, giving a net -26
The new families would be Amytornithidae, Myzaidae, and Pteruthiidae (borderline)

In return, we lose Platylophidae (merged into Laniidae), Picathartidae and Chaetopidae into Eupetidae, Erythrocercidae and Scotocercidae into Cettiidae, Paradoxornithidae into Sylviidae, Pellorneidae, Alcippeidae, and Leiothrichidae into Timaliidae, Polioptilidae into Troglodytidae, Buphagidae and Mimidae into Sturnidae, Turdidae into Muscicapidae, Dicaeidae into Nectariniidae, and of course pretty much all nine-primaried oscines into Emberizidae

 

[Welsh Peregrine]

I for one would love to see this full list; if you don’t post it here would you be willing to message me?

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

, Myzidae,

Myzaidae 😉

 

[Mysticete]

I for one would love to see this full list; if you don’t post it here would you be willing to message me?

Sure...there might be some wrong names in here since I didn't take the chance to check priority, and apologies in advance for any misspellings. I'm just posting the "new families", not posting ALL families that would be valid under this metric. ? represent either groups with few time-dated phylogenies or where the exact phylogenetic position isn't quite nailed down yet

Tinamous
"Nothocercidae", Eudromiidae, Rhynchotidae

Ducks
Dendrocygnidae (Whistling ducks), Biziuridae (Musk Ducks) (?), Nettapodidae (Pygmy Geese) (?), Erasmaturidae (Stiff-tailed Ducks), Anseridae (Swans and Geese)

Chickens, Quail, and Pheasants"
Ptilopachidae (Stone Partridges), "Xenoperdixidae" (African Highland Partridges), Rollulidae (Asian Hill Partridges), Argusianidae (Arguses), Pavonidae (Peacocks), "Tropicoperdicidae" (Peacock-Partridges), Polyplectronidae (Peacock-Pheasants), Gallidae (Chickens), Coturnicidae (Old World Quail), Lerwidae (Snow Partridge), Ithaginidae (Blood Pheasant)

Pigeons and Doves
Claravidae (American- Ground Doves), Starnoenadidae (Blue-headed Quail-Dove) (?), Treronidae (Green Pigeons), Turturidae (Emerald Doves), Gallicolumbidae (Bleeding-hearts), Phabidae (Australasian Doves), Trugonidae (Thick-billed Ground Pigeon), Otidiphapidae (Pheasant-Pigeons), Gouridae (Crowned Pigeons), Didunculidae (Tooth-billed Pigeons), Raphidae (Dodos), Phapitreronidae (Brown Doves), Ptilinopidae (Fruit Doves and Imperial Pigeons)

Turacos
Corythaeolidae (Great Blue Turacos), Criniferidae (Go-away-Birds and Plaintain-eaters)

Cuckoos
Crotophagidae (Anis and American Ground Cuckoos), Centropodidae (Couas, and Coucals)

Nightjars
Eurostopodidae (Australasian Nightjars), "Lyncornidae" (Eared-Nightjars) (?), "Gactornithidae" (Collared Nightjars)

Frogmouths
"Rigidipennidae" (Solomons Frogmouths), Batrachostomidae (Asian Frogmouths)

Apodiformes
Cypseloididae (Primitive American Swifts) (?)

I'll pick up the list in the moment...having some computer issues and don't want to lose the post!

 

[jts1882]

I like this split. It provides a better view of the diversity. The current arrangement under-represents it, with half the total families being passerines, while the earlier time cut-off reduced the number of passerine families too much to be useful.

 

[Mysticete]

Cranes and Rails
Himantornithidae (Primitive Rails) (?), Pardirallidae (Wood-rails and Allies), Fulicidae (Coots, Moorhens, and Soras), Porphyrionidae (Swamphens), Zapornidae (True Crakes)

Gulls and Shorebirds
*Note...I used the most recent Cerny et al phylogeny. There are a lot of error bars within traditional Charadriidae, so I mostly didn't carve it up. Also I undercounted this and forgot some of the new proposed families, so it's more than the listed above number
"Hesperoburhinidae" (New World Thick-knees), Oreopholidae (Tawny-throated Dotterel), Hoplopteridae (Pied Lapwings), "Phegornithidae" (Sandpiper-Plovers), "Nycticryphidae" (New World Painted Snipe), "Actophilornithidae" (Old World Jacanas), Bartramidae (Upland Sandpiper), Numeniidae (Curlews), Limosidae (Godwits), Tringidae (Phalaropes and Shanks), Arenariidae (Turnstones and Stints), Rhinoptilidae (Banded Coursers) (?), Cursoriidae (Plain Coursers) (?), Fraterculidae (Puffins and Auklets), Rynchopidae (Skimmers), Gygidae (White Noddies), Anoidae (Typical Noddies), Sternidae (Terns)

Ibis and Spoonbills
Eudociminidae (New World Ibis)

Pelecans, Cormorants, and Herons
Tigriornithidae (Tiger-Herons) (?), Cochleariidae (Boat-billed Herons) (?)

 

[Mysticete]

Hawks and Eagles
Gampsonychidae (Pearl Kites), Elanidae (Elanine Kites), Polyboroididae (Harrier-Hawks), Gypohieracidae (Palm-nut Vultures), Gypaetidae (Lammergeiers), Eutriorchidae (Malagasy Serpent-Eagles), Chondrohieracidae (Hook-billed Kites), Avicedidae (Bazas and Cuckoo-Hawks), Pernidae (Typical Honey Buzzards), Elanoididae (Swallow-tailed Kites and Allies), Henicopernidae (Long-tailed Honey Buzzards), Gypidae (Old World Vultures), Circaetidae (Serpent Eagles), Aquilidae (Booted Eagles), Harpiidae (Harpies), Lophospizidae (Crested Goshawks), Meleraxidae (Chanting Goshawks), Kaupifalconidae (Lizard-Buzzards), Harpagidae (Tiny Hawks), Buteonidae (Sea Eagles, Buzzards, and Black Kites)

Owls
Phodilidae (Bay Owls), Ninoxidae (Booboks) (?), Surniidae (Owlets and Pygmy Owls) (?)

Hoopoes and Hornbills
Tockidae (African Savannah Hornbills) (?), "Berenicornithidae" (African Forest Hornbills) (?)

Kingfishers and Bee-eaters
Nyctyornithidae (Bearded Bee-eaters), Cerylidae (Water Kingfishers), Halcyonidae (Tree Kingfishers)

Jacamars and Puffbirds
Brachygalbidae ("Drab Jacamars"), Nonnulidae (Nunlets)

Barbets and Woodpeckers
Jyngidae (Wrynecks), Picumnidae (New World Piculets), Sasiidae (Old World Piculets)

Falcons and Caracaras
Herpetotheridae (Forest-Falcons and Laughing Falcons), Caracaridae (Caracaras)

Parrots
Nestoridae (Kakas and Keas), Nymphicidae (Cockatiels), Calyptorhynchidae (Black Cockatoos), Aridae (New World Parrots), Psittrichasidae (Pesquet's Parrot), Coracopseidae (Vasa Parrots), Micropsittidae (Pygmy Parrots), Polytelidae (King Parrots and Allies), Psittacellidae (Tiger-Parrots), Pezoporidae (Ground and Night Parrots), Platycercidae (Rosellas and Allies), Agapornithidae (Lovebirds and Hanging Parrots), Loriidae (Fig Parrots and Lorikeets)

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Family divisions are extremely extreme

 

[Mysticete]

Family divisions are extremely extreme

Yes but not exactly unexpected. Whereas the Eocene demarcation did a good job with Non-Passeriformes but overlumped songbirds, this one does okay with songbirds but significantly increases the number of families for non-songbirds A soft approach however lumped anything of Miocene age or younger but split anything of Eocene age or older seems like the most "conservative" improvement over the current system.

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Frogmouths
"Rigidipennidae" (Solomons Frogmouths), Batrachostomidae (Asian Frogmouths)

Rigidipenna is inseparable from Podargidae. it was previously treated as a subspecies of a Podargus

 

[Mysticete]

Rigidipenna is inseparable from Podargidae. it was previously treated as a subspecies of a Podargus

That's not quite true. There is a difference between "Differences were never noticed because no one bothered looking" and "has no morphological differences". Especially with species that are poorly represented in museum collections.

from the paper describing the genus:
A large podargid with eight rectrices, not ten as found in all species of Podargus and Batrachostomus (Fig. 2). Outer rectrices generally very coarse, with 9 barbs/cm compared with approximately 15 barbs/cm in other genera (Fig. 3). The central rectrices are broad, coarse and stiff with rounded tips, further separating it from Podargus, which generally has narrower, softer and more pointed central rectrices. As in Podargus, sexes differ slightly in plumage coloration, with the male having darker dorsal plumage than the female
(such dimorphism more extreme in Batrachostomus^.

Unique osteological characters are as follows. Coracoid: processus procoracoideus deep. Sternum: processus craniolateralis wide and irregularly tapering
in lateral aspect; carini sterni dramatically expanded over dorsal half in anterior aspect. Humérus: proximal part of fossa músculo brachialis gradual and shallow. Ulna: tuberculum ligamentum coUateralis ventralis protrudes gradually. Carpometacarpus: proximal tubercle on os metacarpale minus large, distad.
Femur: proximo-ventral surface of corpus femoris convex; condylus lateralis and trochlea fibularis shallow and blunt in lateral aspect (Fig. 4). Tarso-
metatarsus: cotyla medialis barely flared from shaft in acrotarsial aspect (Fig. 4); trochlea metatarsi IV shallow with relatively flat plantar surface in lateral aspect.

 

[jts1882]

Question on subfamilies of Tinamidae.

In your older split (post #2) you mention Nothurinae as the traditional subfamily to be elevated. Then you list Eudromidae under the families elevated in the soft cutoff post (post #17).

I found the dates below for the subfamilies. Is this the basis for using Eudromidae?

Nothurinae Miranda-Ribeiro, 1938
Rhynchotinae von Boettischer, 1934
Eudrominae von Boettischer, 1934

 

[Jim LeNomenclatoriste]

Eudrominae von Boettischer, 1934

In fact Eudromiinae Bonaparte, 1854

 

[Mysticete]

LeNomenclatoriste corrected me since my earlier post, hence the change.

 

[kweetal]

Rhynchotinae von Boettischer, 1934
Eudrominae von Boettischer, 1934

Maybe it doesn't matter but surely that should be 'Boetticher'. (Wikipedia (Nothurinae) got it wrong too)

 

[Acanthis]

Hawks and Eagles
Gampsonychidae (Pearl Kites), Elanidae (Elanine Kites), Polyboroididae (Harrier-Hawks), Gypohieracidae (Palm-nut Vultures), Gypaetidae (Lammergeiers), Eutriorchidae (Malagasy Serpent-Eagles), Chondrohieracidae (Hook-billed Kites), Avicedidae (Bazas and Cuckoo-Hawks), Pernidae (Typical Honey Buzzards), Elanoididae (Swallow-tailed Kites and Allies), Henicopernidae (Long-tailed Honey Buzzards), Gypidae (Old World Vultures), Circaetidae (Serpent Eagles), Aquilidae (Booted Eagles), Harpiidae (Harpies), Lophospizidae (Crested Goshawks), Meleraxidae (Chanting Goshawks), Kaupifalconidae (Lizard-Buzzards), Harpagidae (Tiny Hawks), Buteonidae (Sea Eagles, Buzzards, and Black Kites)

Owls
Phodilidae (Bay Owls), Ninoxidae (Booboks) (?), Surniidae (Owlets and Pygmy Owls) (?)

Hoopoes and Hornbills
Tockidae (African Savannah Hornbills) (?), "Berenicornithidae" (African Forest Hornbills) (?)

Kingfishers and Bee-eaters
Nyctyornithidae (Bearded Bee-eaters), Cerylidae (Water Kingfishers), Halcyonidae (Tree Kingfishers)

Jacamars and Puffbirds
Brachygalbidae ("Drab Jacamars"), Nonnulidae (Nunlets)

Barbets and Woodpeckers
Jyngidae (Wrynecks), Picumnidae (New World Piculets), Sasiidae (Old World Piculets)

Falcons and Caracaras
Herpetotheridae (Forest-Falcons and Laughing Falcons), Caracaridae (Caracaras)

Parrots
Nestoridae (Kakas and Keas), Nymphicidae (Cockatiels), Calyptorhynchidae (Black Cockatoos), Aridae (New World Parrots), Psittrichasidae (Pesquet's Parrot), Coracopseidae (Vasa Parrots), Micropsittidae (Pygmy Parrots), Polytelidae (King Parrots and Allies), Psittacellidae (Tiger-Parrots), Pezoporidae (Ground and Night Parrots), Platycercidae (Rosellas and Allies), Agapornithidae (Lovebirds and Hanging Parrots), Loriidae (Fig Parrots and Lorikeets)

Cool!
There's one or two of these I hadn't considered separating since time-calibration wasn't my top priority, but will give them another look now.
Thanks!👌

 

[Mysticete]

Anyway, to sum things up for Families:

1) Using the Eocene as an absolute Calibration Point does a pretty good job of recognizing Non-Passeriformes diversity, but fails to capture the diversity in songbirds, to a degree that makes even the use of lower ranks difficult.

2) Using the Oligocene has the opposite problem. It does a pretty good job of capturing songbird diversity, but requires a much more radical revision of non-songbird taxa, elevating a very large number of subfamiles to Family ranks

3) Using a "soft" approach which recognized really old (e.g. Eocene) and lumps really young (e.g. Miocene) taxa reigns in the really young taxa and and at least reduces some age discrepancy, by allowing very old lineages to get family status

That brings us to a fourth option. What if we just give up and decide to use completely different Calibration point for songbirds vs non-songbirds? This would effectively be another way of phrasing 3. In this case, taxa of Oligocene age would be elevated to families if they are songbirds, but for non-songbirds we would use the Eocene. This is subtly different from option 3 however, in that we could still use this system to also apply to subfamilies. For instance, if Eocene aged-lineages are families, then Oligocene-aged lineages are subfamilies for non-songbirds. But what sort of date could we use Subfamilies for songbirds. We can't just say Miocene because that is a pretty long period of time that only ended a relatively short time ago. We need to be more specific.

One option for calibrating songbird families is a event called the Middle Miocene Climatic optimum. This was a protracted period of warmer than normal weather (which might actually be a good proxy for anthropogenic climate change), that spanned from about 17-14 Million years ago. This warm period encouraged a massive increase in global forests, with forests again in the Arctic, although not tropical forests like before. The cooling that occurred afterwards seems to have also led to a slew of extinctions on both land and sea. Interestingly, just eyeballing the dates of divergences in the Oliveira et al 2019 tree, this event correlates well with the diversification of nine-primaried oscines, and most of the existing families, other than a few low diversity oddballs, would be given subfamily rank.

 

[Acanthis]

Anyway, to sum things up for Families:

1) Using the Eocene as an absolute Calibration Point does a pretty good job of recognizing Non-Passeriformes diversity, but fails to capture the diversity in songbirds, to a degree that makes even the use of lower ranks difficult.

2) Using the Oligocene has the opposite problem. It does a pretty good job of capturing songbird diversity, but requires a much more radical revision of non-songbird taxa, elevating a very large number of subfamiles to Family ranks

3) Using a "soft" approach which recognized really old (e.g. Eocene) and lumps really young (e.g. Miocene) taxa reigns in the really young taxa and and at least reduces some age discrepancy, by allowing very old lineages to get family status

That brings us to a fourth option. What if we just give up and decide to use completely different Calibration point for songbirds vs non-songbirds? This would effectively be another way of phrasing 3. In this case, taxa of Oligocene age would be elevated to families if they are songbirds, but for non-songbirds we would use the Eocene. This is subtly different from option 3 however, in that we could still use this system to also apply to subfamilies. For instance, if Eocene aged-lineages are families, then Oligocene-aged lineages are subfamilies for non-songbirds. But what sort of date could we use Subfamilies for songbirds. We can't just say Miocene because that is a pretty long period of time that only ended a relatively short time ago. We need to be more specific.

One option for calibrating songbird families is a event called the Middle Miocene Climatic optimum. This was a protracted period of warmer than normal weather (which might actually be a good proxy for anthropogenic climate change), that spanned from about 17-14 Million years ago. This warm period encouraged a massive increase in global forests, with forests again in the Arctic, although not tropical forests like before. The cooling that occurred afterwards seems to have also led to a slew of extinctions on both land and sea. Interestingly, just eyeballing the dates of divergences in the Oliveira et al 2019 tree, this event correlates well with the diversification of nine-primaried oscines, and most of the existing families, other than a few low diversity oddballs, would be given subfamily rank.

Yup! I'm looking at "The Largest Avian Radiation" 's dated phylogenetic tree right now and that works for many traditional families. And for those of us who like odd or unusual splits, there are a few unexpected delights. For instance Turdidae and Tyrannidae😊