Part Accipitriformes to Charadriiformes
Download 0.57 Mb.
|
1. [relationships of family, sequence of genera] [add subfamilies?]. Sibley & Ahlquist (1985, 1990) found that the Tyrannidae consisted of two major groups, the "Mionectidae" for Mionectes and several genera of small flycatchers placed in the subfamily Elaeniinae (sensu Traylor 1979a); Sibley & Ahlquist's data also indicated that the "Mionectidae" and Tyrannidae were not sister groups. Subsequent analyses (S. Lanyon 1985, W. Lanyon 1988a, b) did not support such a division. However, Chesser (2004) found the same deep division in the Tyrannidae, but found that the two groups were sisters. Tello et al. (2009) found that Mionectes was deeply embedded in the Tyrannidae and sister to Leptopogon. For detailed discussions of relationships among genera, see Traylor (1977) and Lanyon (1985, 1986, 1988a, 1988b, 1988c). [incorp. Birdsley (2002), Fitzpatrick 2004]. Tello et al. (2009) have conducted the first comprehensive, gene-based analysis of relationships within the family and have discovered a number of novel relationships not yet reflected in the classification above or the Notes below, including grouping of Onychorhynchus, Myiobius, and Terenotriccus with Oxyruncus (Oxyruncidae). Ohlson et al. (2013) proposed dividing the Tyrannidae into families: Onychorhynchidae (for Onychorhynchus, Myiobius, and Terenotriccus), Platyrinchidae (for Calyptura, Neopipo, and Platyrinchus), Tachuridae (for Tachuris), Rhynchocyclidae (for Mionectes through Oncostoma, with three subfamilies), and Tyrannidae (with remaining genera, divided into five subfamilies and several additional tribes). SACC proposal needed. 2. Although Fitzpatrick (2004) followed Traylor's (1977, 1979a) broad definition of Phyllomyias, he noted that this genus is likely polyphyletic, with P. fasciatus, P. griseocapilla, and P. griseiceps possibly forming a group unrelated to the other species, which would force minimally the resurrection of Tyranniscus (see Note 6). 2a. The species burmeisteri was formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Pinto 1944, Meyer de Schauensee 1970) separated in the genus Acrochordopus based on tarsal morphology, but Acrochordopus was merged into Phyllomyias by Traylor (1977, 1979a). Acrochordopus was considered to belong in the Cotingidae by Ridgway (1907), but see Wetmore & Phelps (1956); the name Idiotriccus was formerly (e.g. Ridgway 1907) used for Acrochordopus. 2b. Wetmore (1972), Stiles & Skutch (1989), Sibley & Monroe (1990), Ridgely & Tudor (1994), and Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) recognized the northern subspecies zeledoni as a separate species based from Phyllomyias burmeisteri on described vocal differences; this treatment returns to earlier ones (Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Zimmer 1941c, Phelps & Phelps 1950a) that treated the two as separate before Meyer de Schauensee's (1966, 1970) and Traylor's (1977, 1979a) classifications. Stiles & Skutch (1989) further recognized Andean birds as a separate species, P. leucogonys, from Central American P. zeledoni, returning to the classification of (REF). Proposals needed. Elevation of these taxa to species rank was not followed by Fitzpatrick (2004) due to lack of published analyses of vocal differences or other data. 3. The species virescens (with urichi), reiseri , and sclateri, were formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Zimmer 1941b, Pinto 1944, Phelps & Phelps 1950a, Meyer de Schauensee 1970) placed in the genus Xanthomyias, but this was merged into Phyllomyias by Traylor (1977, 1979a). 3a. Phyllomyias reiseri and P. virescens were considered conspecific by Cory & Hellmayr (1927), Meyer de Schauensee (1970), and Traylor (1977, 1979a, 1982), but see Zimmer (1955), Meyer de Schauensee (1966), Stotz (1990), and Hayes (1995); they form a superspecies (Sibley & Monroe 1990), along with P. urichi (Fitzpatrick 2004). 3b. Newly described: Herzog et al. (2008). SACC proposal passed to recognize P. weedeni. Herzog et al. (2008) proposed that its closest relative is P. fasciatus. 4. [split from virescens; Silva (1996).]; followed by Fitzpatrick (2004). 5. "Tyranniscus australis," considered a valid species by Meyer de Schauensee (1970), was shown by Traylor (1982) to be a synonym of Phyllomyias sclateri. See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. 5a. Called "Crested Tyrannulet" in Wetmore (1972). 6. The species nigrocapillus, cinereiceps, and uropygialis were formerly (e.g., Ridgway 1907, Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Zimmer 1941b, Phelps & Phelps 1950a, Meyer de Schauensee 1970) placed in a separate genus, Tyranniscus, but they were transferred to Phyllomyias by Traylor (1977, 1979a). <check gracilipes -- in Tyranniscus in Pinto 1944> 7. Phyllomyias plumbeiceps and P. griseocapilla were formerly (e.g., Zimmer 1941c, Meyer de Schauensee 1970) placed in a separate genus, Oreotriccus, but this was merged into Phyllomyias by Traylor (1977, 1979a), a return to the classification of <check Cory & Hellmayr 1927>, Pinto (1944). 7a. The tarsal morphology of Tyrannulus has been interpreted to indicate that it belongs in the Cotingidae (Ridgway 1907). Traylor (1977) considered Tyrannulus most closely related to Myiopagis because of plumage similarities to M. gaimardii. 7b. The genus Myiopagis was formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927) included in Elaenia; Zimmer (1941b) treated the two as separate, and this has been followed in all subsequent classifications. Tello et al. (2009) found that Myiopagis and Suiriri were sister genera, and that Elaenia was the sister to these two. SACC proposal needed to change linear sequence. Within Myiopagis, Rheindt et al. (2009) found the following relationships (caniceps + olallai) + [(subplacens + gaimardii) + (flavivertex + viridicata)]. Proposal needed to modify linear sequence. 7c. Hilty (2003) suspected that Myiopagis caniceps might not belong in that genus, but Rheindt et al. (2009) confirmed that it belongs there. 7cc. "Serpophaga araguayae," known only from the type specimen from Goiás, Brazil, and formerly considered a valid species (e.g., Pinto 1944, Meyer de Schauensee 1966, 1970), is a synonym of Myiopagis c. caniceps (Silva 1990). See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. 7ccc. Genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2009) reveal that Myiopagis caniceps consist of two species, with strong plumage differences between them (Fitzpatrick 2004), and that M. olallai is nested within M. caniceps as currently defined. Proposal needed. 7d. Ridgway (1907) considered Myiopagis gaimardii to be in the monotypic genus Elainopsis and placed it in the Cotingidae based on tarsal morphology, but see Zimmer (1941a) for placement in Myiopagis. Recent genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2009, Tello et al. 2009) confirm this placement. 7e. "Serpophaga berliozi," described as a valid species from Amazonas, Peru, is now considered a synonym of Myiopagis g. gaimardii (Meyer de Schauensee 1966, Mayr 1971, Traylor 1979a). 8. Recently described: Coopmans & Krabbe (2000). See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. 8b. Myiopagis viridicata and M. cotta of Jamaica are sister species (Fitzpatrick 2004); they were considered conspecific by . 8c. Hilty (2003) suspected that Myiopagis viridicata might consist of more than one species; genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2009) indicate a very deep split between cis- and trans-Andean populations. 8cc. The species name placens was formerly (e.g., Ridgway 1907) applied to Myiopagis viridicata, but see [REF]. 8d. Fitzpatrick (2004) suggested that Elaenia martinica and E. chiriquensis were sister species. 8e. Olrog (1963) suggested that Elaenia spectabilis should be considered conspecific with E. flavogaster. 8ee. Genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a) indicate that the traditional linear sequence of Elaenia species, as given here, does not accurately reflect phylogenetic relationships among taxa. SACC proposal badly needed. 8f. Fitzpatrick (2004) suggested that Elaenia flavogaster and E. gigas were closely related based on vocal, behavioral, and plumage similarities, but genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a) indicate that they are not closely related. 9. Elaenia ridleyana was formerly (e.g., Zimmer 1941a, Meyer de Schauensee 1970, Traylor 1979a) considered a subspecies of E. spectabilis or of E. chiriquensis (Cory & Hellmayr 1927); treated here as a species separate from following Sick (1985) and Ridgely & Tudor (1994); E. ridleyana forms a superspecies with E. spectabilis (Sibley & Monroe 1990). 10. Ridgely & Tudor (1994) suggested that Elaenia albiceps may consist of two or three species. Fitzpatrick (2004) suggested that Elaenia pallatangae and E. albiceps might be closely related; they may hybridize to an uncertain extent in N. Peru (Fjeldså & Krabbe 1990). Rheindt et al. (2008a) found that Andean populations (Cuzco) were genetically more similar to sympatric populations of E. pallatangae but suggested that this could be due to gene flow between them. Rheindt et al. (2009) provided evidence that the subspecies chilensis is actually more closely related E. pallatangae. Proposal badly needed. 10a. Elaenia frantzii and E. obscura were considered to form a superspecies by AOU (1983) but not by subsequent authors; they were formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927) considered conspecific; Zimmer (1941a) provided rationale for their treatment as separate species, and this has been followed in most subsequent classifications. Genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a) indicate that they are not closely related. Fitzpatrick (2004) suggested that E. dayi might also be closely related to these two; genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008) indicate that E. dayi and E. obscura are sister species. 10aa. Rheindt et al. (2008a) proposed that the subspecies sordida be treated as a separate species from E. obscura based on genetic distance and some suggestion that it might be more closely related to E. dayi than to other E. obscura. SACC proposal needed 10b. Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) suggested that the subspecies brachyptera might deserve recognition as a separate species from Elaenia chiriquensis based on vocal differences. Rheindt et al. (2008a) supported species rank for brachyptera based on genetic distance. SACC proposal needed. 10c. Sibley & Monroe (1990) considered Elaenia albiceps and E. parvirostris to form a superspecies. Genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a) indicate that they are not closely related. Although they seem to intergrade in some areas of central Bolivia, they are sympatric without interbreeding in Argentina (Traylor 1982). 10cc. Zimmer (1941a) proposed that Elaenia cristata and E. ruficeps were probably sister species based on morphology and habitat similarities, and this is strongly supported by genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a). 10ccc. "Elaenia aenigma," described as a valid species from eastern Ecuador, is a synonym of E. parvirostris (Zimmer 1941b, Meyer de Schauensee 1966, Traylor 1979b). See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. 10d. The subspecies modesta was formerly (REF) considered a separate species from Elaenia albiceps, but see Zimmer (1941a). Jaramillo (2003) suggested that E. albiceps consists of more than one species. 10e. The subspecies tyleri of Cerro Duida was described as a separate species from Elaenia dayi (Chapman 1929). 10f. The subspecies olivina of the Tepui region was formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927) considered a separate species from Elaenia pallatangae, but they were treated as conspecific by Zimmer (1941a). Genetic data (Rheindt et al. 2008a, 2009) indicate that olivina is not particularly closely related to E. pallatangae. SACC proposal badly needed. 10g. Elaenia pallatangae and E. albiceps may hybridize to an uncertain extent in Ecuador and N. Peru (Fitzpatrick 2004, Fjeldså & Krabbe 1990). 11. Ornithion brunneicapillus was formerly (e.g., Zimmer 1941, Meyer de Schauensee 1970) considered conspecific with Middle American O. semiflavum, but Slud (1964) noted vocal differences between the two and recommended treatment as separate species. This has been followed by most subsequent classifications (e.g., Wetmore 1972, Traylor 1977, 1979a, Stiles & Skutch 1989, Fitzpatrick 2004), thus returning to the classification of Cory & Hellmayr (1927); they constitute a superspecies (AOU 1983, 1998, Sibley & Monroe 1990, Fitzpatrick 2004). Correct spelling for species name is brunneicapillus, not brunneicapillum (David & Gosselin 2002a). 11b. The tarsal morphology of Ornithion has been interpreted to indicate that it belongs in the Cotingidae (Ridgway 1907). Genetic data (Tello et al. 2009) indicate that it is the sister to Camptostoma. 11c. Ornithion brunneicapillus was formerly (e.g., Cory & Hellmayr 1927) placed with Middle American O. semiflavum in a separate genus, Microtriccus, which Zimmer (1941c) merged into Ornithion; this has been followed by most subsequent classifications (e.g., Traylor 1977, 1979, Ridgely & Tudor 1994, Fitzpatrick 2004), but Wetmore (1972) maintained Microtriccus on the basis of differences in primary shape, rectrix shape, and relative tail length. 11cc. "Ornithion fasciatus," described as a valid species from Peru, is now considered a synonym of Ornithion inerme (Zimmer 1941c, Meyer de Schauensee 1966). See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. 11d. Camptostoma obsoletum forms a superspecies with Middle American C. imberbe (AOU 1983, 1998, Fitzpatrick 2004); Meyer de Schauensee (1966) suggested that they might be conspecific, but they are sympatric in Costa Rica (Stiles & Skutch 1989). 11e. Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) and Fitzpatrick (2004) suggested that Camptostoma obsoletum may consist of more than one species; Rheindt et al. (2008c) found genetic evidence consistent with at least three species, but recommended waiting for additional analyses. Ridgway (1907) treated the Central American and western South American subspecies as a separate species, C. pusillum. Proposal needed. 12. Some authors (Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Short 1975, Sibley & Monroe 1990) considered S. affinis as a species separate from S. suiriri, but they intergrade in southeastern Bolivia, northeastern Paraguay, and southwestern Brazil (Laubmann 1940, Zimmer 1955, Traylor 1982, Hayes 1995, 2001). Their vocalizations are similar (Zimmer et al. 2001), and all 17 specimens from the Paraguayan hybrid zone are intermediate, suggesting free interbreeding (Hayes 1995, 2001). 13. Recently described: Zimmer et al. (2001). 14. Morphological data indicate that Mecocerculus is almost certainly polyphyletic (Lanyon 1988a), but no choice now but to retain as is without further study. With leucophrys as the type species for the genus, placement of the genus arbitrarily reflects the position of M. leucophrys in Lanyon's (1988a) phylogeny. 14a. Mecocerculus poecilocercus and M. hellmayri form a superspecies (Fitzpatrick 2004). 14b. Fjeldså & Krabbe (1990) suggested that he subspecies pallidior of western Peru might be considered a separate species from Mecocerculus leucophrys. 15. Anairetes nigrocristatus was formerly (e.g., Zimmer 1940b, Meyer de Schauensee 1970, Traylor 1977, 1979a) considered conspecific with A. reguloides, but see Fjeldså & Krabbe (1990) and Ridgely & Tudor (1994) for recognition as a separate species, as was suspected was the best treatment by Meyer de Schauensee (1966); they form a superspecies (Sibley & Monroe 1990, Fitzpatrick 2004) and are sister taxa (DuBay & Witt 2012). 15a. Spizitornis was formerly (e.g., Oberholser 1920, Cory & Hellmayr 1927, Zimmer 1940b) used for Anairetes, but see , Meyer de Schauensee 1966). 15b. Genetic data (Roy et al. 1999) confirm that Anairetes parulus and A. fernandezianus are sister species. 15b. Anairetes alpinus was formerly (e.g., reluctantly by Zimmer 1940b) placed in the monotypic genus Yanacea, but this was merged into Anairetes by Meyer de Schauensee (1966, 1970). DuBay & Witt (2012) founded that alpinus is indeed embedded in Anairetes and is sister to A. parulus + A. flavirostris, and together they are sister to A. reguloides + A. nigrocristatus. 16. Uromyias agilis and U. agraphia were traditionally (e.g., Meyer de Schauensee 1970, Traylor (1977, 1979a) placed in Uromyias, many recent classifications (e.g., Dickinson 2003) have merged Uromyias into Anairetes. Although Lanyon (1988a), Ridgely & Tudor (1994), and Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) maintained Uromyias on the basis of morphological and vocal characters, Roy et al.'s (1999) genetic data found that it is embedded within Anairetes. DuBay & Witt (2012), however, refuted this and proposed restoring Uromyias. SACC proposal passed to recognize Uromyias. Uromyias agilis and U. agraphia form a superspecies (Sibley & Monroe 1990). 17. Chebez & Agnolin (2012) provided evidence that Serpophaga is not monophyletic and named a new genus, Holmbergphaga, for the species for the species cinerea, hypoleuca, and nigricans. However, if split, the name Ridgwayornis Bertoni, 1925, would have priority. 17a. Silva (1990) showed that "Serpophaga araguayae," formerly (e.g., Meyer de Schauensee 1970) considered a valid species ("Bananal Tyrannulet"), is actually a synonym of Myiopagis c. caniceps. 18. Serpophaga munda is often considered a subspecies (e.g., Zimmer 1955, Traylor 1977, 1979a, Straneck 1993) or morph (Short 1975) of S. subcristata, but see Olrog (1963) and Herzog (2001). 19. "Serpophaga griseiceps," known from four specimens from Bolivia, was formerly considered a valid species (e.g., Zimmer 1955, Meyer de Schauensee 1966, 1970). Traylor (1979) treated S. griseiceps as a synonym of S. munda; rationale, however, was not published. Straneck (1993) resurrected S. griseiceps as a valid species, but see Herzog & Barnett (2004), who concluded that "griseiceps" most likely represents the juvenal plumage of S. munda. See Hybrids and Dubious Taxa. Straneck (2007) described a new species, Serpophaga griseicapilla, for the taxon previously suspected to be S. "griseiceps." SACC proposal passed to recognize griseicapilla. SACC proposal to change English name did not pass. 20. Ridgely & Tudor (1994) noted that vocal differences suggest that Phaeomyias murina might consist of more than one species. Ridgely & Greenfield (2001) considered the subspecies tumbezana (with inflava and maranonica) of southwestern Ecuador and northwestern Peru to represent a separate species based on differences in vocalizations. Rheindt et al. (2008c) found genetic evidence consistent with two species Proposal needed. Directory: ~Remsen ~Remsen -> Larus belcheri from "Band-tailed Gull" to "Belcher's Gull" ~Remsen -> Larus belcheri from "Band-tailed Gull" to "Belcher's Gull" Download 0.57 Mb. Share with your friends:
|