<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:css="http://macVmlSchemaUri" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta name=Title content=""> <meta name=Keywords content=""> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=macintosh"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 2008"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 2008"> <link rel=File-List href="SACCprop408-411_files/filelist.xml"> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Author>Usuario</o:Author> <o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template> <o:LastAuthor>James Remsen</o:LastAuthor> <o:Revision>2</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>8</o:TotalTime> <o:Created>2010-03-17T17:33:00Z</o:Created> <o:LastSaved>2010-03-17T17:33:00Z</o:LastSaved> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>3590</o:Words> <o:Characters>20464</o:Characters> <o:Company>.</o:Company> <o:Lines>170</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>40</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>25131</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>12.0</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:PixelsPerInch>96</o:PixelsPerInch> <o:TargetScreenSize>800x600</o:TargetScreenSize> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:DisplayBackgroundShape/> <w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:HyphenationZone>21</w:HyphenationZone> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:UseNormalStyleForList/> <w:DontUseIndentAsNumberingTabStop/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:FELineBreak11/> <w:WW11IndentRules/> <w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/> <w:AutofitLikeWW11/> <w:HangulWidthLikeWW11/> </w:Compatibility> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--> <style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Arial; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Century Gothic"; panose-1:2 11 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:SimSun; mso-font-alt:\00CB\00CE\00CC\00E5; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:ES-AR; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} p.MsoTitle, li.MsoTitle, div.MsoTitle {mso-style-link:"Title Char"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language:EN-US; font-weight:bold; mso-bidi-font-weight:normal;} p.MsoBodyTextIndent, li.MsoBodyTextIndent, div.MsoBodyTextIndent {mso-style-link:"Body Text Indent Char"; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:27.0pt; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-indent:-27.0pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} p.MsoBlockText, li.MsoBlockText, div.MsoBlockText {margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} span.TitleChar {mso-style-name:"Title Char"; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:Title; mso-ansi-font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; font-weight:bold; mso-bidi-font-weight:normal;} span.BodyTextIndentChar {mso-style-name:"Body Text Indent Char"; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:"Body Text Indent"; mso-ansi-font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:70.85pt 85.05pt 70.85pt 85.05pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> <!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="2050"> <o:colormru v:ext="edit" colors="#feff01,#f1ead4"/> <o:colormenu v:ext="edit" fillcolor="#f1ead4"/> </o:shapedefaults></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> </head> <body bgcolor="#f1ead4" lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='tab-interval: 35.4pt'> <div class=Section1> <p class=MsoBlockText align=center style='text-align:center'><b style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:16.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>408. Change linear order of current <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>wrens (II)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class=MsoBlockText align=center style='text-align:center'><b style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:16.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>409. Recognize genus <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>(II)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class=MsoBlockText align=center style='text-align:center'><b style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:16.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>410. Recognize genus <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus </i>(II)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class=MsoBlockText align=center style='text-align:center'><b style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:16.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>411. Recognize genus <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus </i>(II)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class=MsoTitle><span style='font-size:16.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle><span style='font-size:16.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'>Proposals (408-411) to <a href="http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCBaseline.html">South American Classification Committee</a><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><b style='mso-bidi-font-weight: normal'><span style='font-size:16.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></b></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>Summary</span></u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>: This proposal would result in a new genus name or names for the current SACC <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>wrens.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>In Proposal <a href="SACCprop219.html">219</a>, all committee members were in favour of taking such a step, but there was no agreement on using Mann et al. (2006)'s three-genus approach for South American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>This decision should be reconsidered in light of vocal analysis by Mann et al. (2009).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, if the three genus approach is again to be rejected, then SACC should either revert to Hellmayr's two genus treatment for S American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i> or move them to other genera<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span></i>The current baseline remains as <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>for all these species,<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'> </i>which cannot be supported.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>Discussion</span></u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>: In Proposal <a href="SACCprop219.html">219</a>, in a close vote, SACC decided not to split S American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i> into three new genera.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, there was considerable support in the comments of dissenters for moving all South American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The proposition that <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>is not monophyletic has strong support from multiple studies, as discussed in Proposal 219 and further shown by Mann et al. (2006) and papers cited therein, with true <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>occurring only outside the SACC region.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>There was some scepticism over Proposal 219 given that Mann et al. (2006)'s diagnosis of the new genus <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus </i>involved only molecular characters: &quot;<i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Currently, no known uniquely derived morphological characteristics diagnose the genus Cantorchilus, as defined here. Given current taxonomic and character sampling, the genus is diagnosable by 9 unreversed synapomorphies in cytochrome b (including: A150C, A156G, C297T, A876C, C903A, C924A, A948G, C960A and C1116A, where aNb refers to the ancestral state a and derived state b at position N), all at third codon positions, including 6 transitions and 3 transversions, one of which results in an amino acid replacement (I372M).</i>&quot; <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>Daniel Cadena (who voted in favour of adopting the three genera) in his comments on Proposal 219 noted &quot;<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>it appears to me that the songs of Thryophilus (rufalbus and nicefori, which I am familiar with) stand out as rather unique when compared to those of other &quot;Thryothorus&quot; I know.</i>&quot;<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>This has now been borne out with analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Mann et al. (2009), based on sampling of almost all relevant species, showed the three proposed genera to be diagnosable on the basis of duetting behaviour and also noted some behavioural differences (separation by forest strata) between members of different proposed new genera where they occur together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>For example, <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i> sensu stricto don't duet or duet in a very temporally uncoordinated fashion, whereas <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Cantorchilus</i> show the highest degree of temporal coordination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Van Remsen (who voted in favour of three genera) noted previously (in summarising the comments of dissenters) that the &quot;<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>three separate genera & are & morphologically &quot;below&quot; the traditional level of generic distinctiveness</i>&quot;.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, Mann et al. (2009) suggest that the three groups are diagnosable by ecological characters in addition to molecular characters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>As a result, the proposed genera are at least as supportable as some of the N American wrens related to this group.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>Given the committee member comments on Proposal 219, changing the genus for S American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>would appear to be unfinished business.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>For those that consider the three genus approach still to be weakly supported, there are two options: (i) reverting to Hellmayr's two genus treatment, which could be regarded as a <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>status quo ante</i> when <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i> is properly restricted to N America; or (ii) place all S American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Pheugopedius</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>In either of these treatments, the non-recognized genera of Mann et al. (2006) could be treated as sub-genera.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>If the SACC later comes to the conclusion that a greater <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Pheugopedius </i>is not monophyletic, as suggested by Mann et al. (2006, 2009), then a further rearrangement could be considered in future, but this would affect less than half of the species currently recognised in this group if <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>is used, or just two species if SACC reverts to Hellmayr's treatment.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>An unfortunate consequence of Proposal 219 being rejected was that the proposed new linear order was also rejected.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Proposal 408 would re-arrange the genus (whatever its name) so as to reflect the relationships suggested by Mann et al. (2006) and recommended in Proposal 261, which maintain the existing order generally but rearrange to show the suggested three (sub-) genera (together with minor tweaks to the order of the <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus </i>group), with &quot;incertae sedis&quot; (within <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i>) <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i> at the end of the order:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext'> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes'> <td width=231 valign=top style='width:231.1pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Old linear order<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=231 valign=top style='width:231.15pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Proposed new linear order<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:1;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes'> <td width=231 valign=top style='width:231.1pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>spadix<br> fasciatoventris<br> euophrys<br> eisenmanni<br> mystacalis<br> genibarbis<br> coraya<br> rutilus<br> sclateri<br> nigricapillus<br> leucopogon<br> <b style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'>rufalbus<br> nicefori</b><br> leucotis<br> superciliaris<br> guarayanus <br> longirostris <br> griseus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=231 valign=top style='width:231.15pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-right:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p align=right style='text-align:right'><i><span style='font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>(sub-)genus Pheugopedius:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>spadix<br> fasciatoventris<br> euophrys<br> eisenmanni<br> mystacalis<br> genibarbis<br> coraya<br> rutilus<br> sclateri</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p align=right style='text-align:right'><i><span style='font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>(sub-)genus Thryophilus:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>rufalbus<br> nicefori</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p align=right style='text-align:right'><i><span style='font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>(sub-)genus Cantorchilus:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>leucopogon<br> nigricapillus<br> superciliaris<br> leucotis<br> longirostris <br> guarayanus<br> griseus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> </tr> </table> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>A positive vote on Proposal 408 would result in this new linear order being adopted.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>As a result of Proposal 219 not passing, all <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus </i>were moved<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'> </i>to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>in the Colombian checklist three years ago (Salaman et al. 2007, 2008, 2009) assuming that SACC would also do so in due course based on comments of committee members.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>One of the authors of this proposal has sought to adopt such an approach in some journal papers including site/regional checklists and range extensions, but has become somewhat fed up with editors and peer reviewers commenting that these birds should be <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i> due to the SACC's treatment (particularly for the &quot;core&quot; <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>that would be recognised in this genus under Mann et al.'s suggested treatment where 10/10 SACC members supported recognising this genus!).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>SACC action on this matter would be welcomed as other persons working with Neotropical birds may have had similar experiences.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>(Another approach would be to merge <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Henicorhina, Uropsila, Cinnycerthia, Cyphorhinus</i> and S American <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus </i>into one genus, but that would cause more nomenclatural instability than it is worth and rob us of some well-defined genera.)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'>The following votes would have the following results, assuming that proposal 408 (on linear order) passes:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:480;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid windowtext'> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes'> <td width=166 valign=top style='width:166.1pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>409 passes, 410 rejected (or 409 and 411 pass but 410 does not):<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=166 valign=top style='width:166.15pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>409 and 410 pass, 411 does not:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=130 valign=top style='width:130.0pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>409, 410 and 411 pass:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:1;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes'> <td width=166 valign=top style='width:166.1pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Pheugopedius:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>spadix<br> fasciatoventris<br> euophrys<br> eisenmanni<br> mystacalis<br> genibarbis<br> coraya<br> rutilus<br> sclateri</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><br> </span><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>rufalbus<br> nicefori<br> leucopogon<br> nigricapillus<br> superciliaris<br> leucotis<br> longirostris <br> guarayanus<br> griseus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=166 valign=top style='width:166.15pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-right:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Pheugopedius:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>spadix<br> fasciatoventris<br> euophrys<br> eisenmanni<br> mystacalis<br> genibarbis<br> coraya<br> rutilus<br> sclateri</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Thryophilus:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>rufalbus<br> nicefori</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><br> </span><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>leucopogon<br> nigricapillus<br> superciliaris<br> leucotis<br> longirostris <br> guarayanus<br> griseus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=130 valign=top style='width:130.0pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-right:solid windowtext 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Pheugopedius:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>spadix<br> fasciatoventris<br> euophrys<br> eisenmanni<br> mystacalis<br> genibarbis<br> coraya<br> rutilus<br> sclateri</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Thryophilus:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>rufalbus<br> nicefori</span></i><span style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Cantorchilus:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p><i><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>leucopogon<br> nigricapillus<br> superciliaris<br> leucotis<br> longirostris <br> guarayanus<br> griseus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> </tr> </table> <p class=MsoBlockText><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-GB'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText style='text-align:justify'><u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>References:<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Mann, N.I., et al. 2006. Molecular data delineate four genera of &quot;Thryothorus&quot; wrens. <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Mol. Phylogenet. Evol</i>. 40: 750-759. http://www.tc.umn.edu/~barke042/Publications.php<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Mann, N.I., Dingess, K.A., Barker, F.K., Graves, J.A., Slater, P.J.B. 2009. A comparative study of song form and duetting in Neotropical <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i> wrens.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span><i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Behaviour </i>146, 1-43<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText style='text-align:justify'><u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Recommendations</span></u><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>: (From Thomas Donegan): I would strongly recommend a YES vote to 408 and 409; for votes 410-411, I can see reasons why committee members might vote either way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>My own view is that a yes vote is more sensible in both instances.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Mann et al. (2006, 2009) taken together provide a solid rationale for their recommendations and have clearly considered the issues at length.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Their diagnosis of the three new genera now has real world as well as molecular support.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Given that all the genus names of these species will be changed anyway, <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>a priori</i>, their treatment should probably best be followed rather than being second guessed.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText style='text-align:justify'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>(From Keith Barker): I would strongly recommend a YES vote for all four of these proposals, for the reasons set out in Mann et al. (2006, 2009).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, if <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i> is not to be recognized, I would strongly recommend voting yes on 408-110, taking us to the <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>status quo ante</i> Hellmayr s lumping of all within <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i>, and avoiding placement of taxa into <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> that have never been there.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBlockText align=center style='text-align:center'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Thomas Donegan &amp; F. Keith Barker, August 2009<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>=====================================================<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'>Comments from <u>Stiles</u>: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> 408. YES. The new linear order presented clearly reflects phylogeny better than our current arrangement.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> 409. YES, to recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>; the Neotropical species clearly do not belong in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i>; their inclusion would render this genus polyphyletic.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US'> From here on, however, things get a bit dicier. The proposal contains some confusion regarding whether the current practice of lumping all into <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i>vs.<i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'> </i>the  two-genus approach of recognizing <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryophilus </i>and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> is due to Hellmayr or is  pre-Hellmayr .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Looking up what Hellmayr actually wrote in  birds of the Americas (1934), I find that he indeed lumped all the Neotropical forms (as well as <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>ludovicianus</i>, the only  true <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i>) into a single genus.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, the idea was not original with him; he was following van Rossem (Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist. 6, p. 208, date not given) in stating:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span> & the differences between <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>, with open nostrils, and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>, with partly operculate nasal groove, is so completely bridged by intermediate species that no dividing line can be drawn.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Moreover, the two types of nostrils, used as criteria for generic distinction, even occur within the same species, the case of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>T. modestus</i> being very appropriately cited by van Rossem as a striking example of such variation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>If <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>and<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'> Thryophilus </i>be merged, there is no valid ground for the retention (sic) of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i>, since a good many species of  <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryophilus</i> agree with the Carolina Wren in the lesser graduation of the tail. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US'> If these were the only features defining <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Pheugopedius</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>, their lumping would seem to be in order, but Hellmayr did not give diagnoses for genera. I therefore went to Ridgway (Birds of N. and Middle America, USNM Bull. 50, vol. 3, 1904) for these.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The following table summarizes the points of difference that I was able to extract from Ridgway s diagnoses: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook:1184;mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid black;mso-border-insidev:.5pt solid black'> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Pheugopedius<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%; font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>feature<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Thryophilus<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:1'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Longitudinal to fusiform<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Nostril<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Small, round or oval<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:2'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Decumbent operculum overhangs nostril, posterior end contacting with or overhung by feathers of nasofrontal antiae<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Operculum<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>No operculum, but a naked membrane may extend along upper edge of nostril, separated from nasofrontal antiae<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:3'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Graduated for 1/3 or more of its length<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Tail<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Graduated for 1/3 or less of its length<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:4'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Straight for e" &frac12; of its length, abruptly decurved terminally<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Exposed culmen<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Straight to slightly decurved, gradually decurved terminally<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:5'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Slightly concave, deflexed basally, slight indication of subterminal notch<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Maxillary tomium<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Straight to slightly decurved terminally with distinct subterminal notch<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:6'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Short but distinct, occasionally 1-2 well developed<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Rictal bristles<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Obvious, 1-3 well developed<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:7'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Short, rounded; primaries 3-7 or 4-6 longest, 8&lt;&lt;3<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Wing shape<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Moderate, rounded; primaries 4-7 longest, 8 variable<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> <tr style='mso-yfti-irow:8;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes'> <td width=168 valign=top style='width:168.45pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>D(igit) 4 w/o claw reaches to middle of subterminal phalanx of d3, claw reaches base of claw of d3<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=99 valign=top style='width:99.2pt;border-top:none;border-left:none; border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt; padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Length of toes<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> <td width=165 valign=top style='width:164.55pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;border-right:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>D4 w/o claw reaches subterminal joint of d4, claw does not reach base of claw of d3<o:p></o:p></span></p> </td> </tr> </table> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:35.4pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>As a basis for separating genera, this is cutting it pretty fine, but is fairly typical of generic diagnoses of Ridgway s time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>I then went to our collection to check out these characters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Surprisingly, I found that in specimens in which the nasal area was intact, the difference cited by Ridgway does seem to hold in most cases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>All species show a naked membrane partly covering the nostrils but in all of the <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>, this extends from the dorsal edge of the nasal fossa and does partly cover the nostril &#8211; although in some where the membrane has been pulled back, the nostril appears more rounded.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>In <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>, this membrane extends from the proximal end of the fossa distally to the nostril, which does indeed appear more rounded &#8211; but in a few the dorsal extension is more pronounced, though never so much as in the <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>(We do not have <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>T. modestus </i>here, so I could not check directly van Rossem s statement.)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The tail is indeed more graduated in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>, but in some <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i> it approaches pretty closely this degree of graduation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Regarding the curvature of the culmen, there is much variation within species: the tendency for a more strongly decurved tip in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Pheugopedius</i> holds, but some (young?) individuals show a more gradual curvature; a few individuals of several species in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryophilus </i>have more abruptly curved bill tips, though not so pronounced as in most <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius. </i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;</span>The same goes for the subterminal notch: though on average it is more pronounced in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>, one can find the full range of variation in virtually all species.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>I did not go into detail regarding wing shape, but again, primary 3 seems to average relatively longer in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>but the difference is pretty slight<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>. </i>I could see no consistent difference in the relative length of the toes, and the rictal bristles seemed to vary more according to preparation than anything else.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>In conclusion, there is some morphological basis for recognition of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus </i>as distinct from <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> but the differences are often slight and bridged by individual variation in many cases (perhaps related to age for bill shape?).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Given that these differences, such as they are, do correlate with the genetic data, I could be induced to vote a lukewarm YES on proposal 410 to recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus </i>(although I would not be surprised &#8211; or heartbroken - if many SACC members disagreed with me). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><span style='mso-tab-count:1'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span> However, I could find no morphological character(s) that would convincingly separate <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus </i>(<i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>sensu stricto</i>) from Cantorchilus<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>. </i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;</span>I am reluctant to base a genus on zero morphological differences (but if Keith or Thomas wish to conduct a more thorough morphological analysis and do find something, I could go along with it).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The song differences are interesting, but I am also reluctant to use such differences to separate genera in oscines where song learning is pronounced and local song dialects are frequent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>In species like <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>rufalbus</i>, sometimes one hears perfect coordination between males and females (the female adding her notes to the end of the male s with no discernable break, as in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>modestus, </i>for example), at other times (especially in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>minlosi</i> of the Llanos) coordination seems lacking or less developed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Hence, I will vote NO on 411, at least for the present, though I am willing to recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i> as a subgenus of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i> (or <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>) based on the genetics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>In passing, I note that the recognition of species in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Scytalopus</i> is based to a great extent upon song differences that line up with genetic differences, but here we are dealing at the species, not genus level in a group in which song learning is presumed to be absent.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><span style='mso-tab-count:1'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span> I also note that no genetic data are available for <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>T. griseus</i>, which is morphologically much more distinctive than anything in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius </i>or <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i> with its much shorter and nearly non-graduated tail and grey coloration (and canopy habitat?).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Not having the song paper I don t know if its song was included in the pertinent paper of Mann et al., but on the face of it, it might well be worth looking at (we have a recent specimen here, Daniel!) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoBodyTextIndent style='margin-left:0in;text-indent:0in;tab-stops: 31.5pt'><u><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Comments from Robbins</span></u><span style='font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family: Arial'>:  YES.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span></span><span style='font-family:Arial'>I m on the fence on this one, as it really doesn t bother me that <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i> is defined primarily by genetics (vocal data are suggestive).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The morphological differences between the <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i> clades are so slight that if those were the only data supporting recognition of those two genera then I would vote no on that proposal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Thus, in an attempt to be consistent, I vote for the recognizing <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i>, although I m not totally convinced that this is the right course of action. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Comments from Zimmer</span></u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>:  </span><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'> </span><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'>Proposal #408:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Change the linear order of current <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i> wrens.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>YES, our current arrangement does not square with the available evidence.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'> Proposal #409:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Again, YES, as the evidence is pretty clear that <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i> applies only to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>ludovicianus/albinucha</i>, and that all of the South American species belong somewhere else.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'> Proposal #410:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>YES, based on the combination of molecular evidence, vocal evidence (as outlined in Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>et al.</i> 2009), and Gary s assessment of Ridgway s diagnosis of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Pheugopedius</i> versus <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'> Proposal #411:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Recognize <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Gary s points on this one are well taken.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Although there is definite morphological cohesion between most of the species that would be placed in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i> (<i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>superciliaris, leucotis, longirostris, guarayanus</i>), there is little if anything in the way of morphological characters that would allow the genus to be diagnosed relative to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>I also share Gary s hesitance regarding the use of vocal differences to define a genus of oscine passerines, which can learn their songs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, I think that Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>et al</i> are really on to something as regards vocal differences in duetting behaviors in these wrens.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>When you read through the list of different singing styles (Table 4 in Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>et al. </i>2009) it is somewhat confusing because of the sheer complexity of the vocalizations and duetting behaviors involved.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>But, if you have field experience with the species involved, you can see the patterns that Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>et al</i> refer to, and many of the species in each proposed  new genus do sort out as having similar singing  styles .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>It seems to me that the underpinnings that allow males and females of one species to frequently engage in highly coordinated, complex, antiphonal duets, as opposed to those species in which duetting is relatively rare and/or less coordinated are more likely to be genetically based than are simple differences in song dialects, which, in this family, can obviously be learned.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>We still don t really have a handle on what constitutes genus-level vocal distinctions, although I am reminded of that old quote regarding obscenity &#8211;  we can t really define it, but we know it when we see it .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Clearly, there is more work to be done in refining some of Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>et al s</i> song style categories, and, as the authors themselves point out, not every species in each proposed genus displays the same song styles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, the authors have provided a good platform for investigating the extent of the genetic basis for the differences in vocal behavior in these wrens, and I do think that where there is smoke there is fire.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'> Gary raised the question of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>T. griseus</i>, which would seem to be a potential fly-in-the-ointment for any proposed phylogenetic arrangement, because without DNA we really don t know where it belongs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Morphologically, it is more different from all other  <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus </i> than any of them are from one another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>And no, Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>et al</i> 2009 did not have vocal data on <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i> in their paper.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>However, I find it interesting that under their proposed arrangement, <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>griseus</i> would be in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i>, as would <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>leucopogon</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>thoracicus</i> (of Central </span><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%; font-family:Arial'>America</span><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'>).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>I recently published a paper detailing observations on vocalizations (including duetting behavior), ecology, and nesting of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>T. griseus</i> (Zimmer &amp; Whittaker 2009, <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cotinga</i> 31:80-85), and off the top of my head, I would say that the singing style of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i> would be closest to Style 9 as defined by Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>et al.</i> (which was published while our Gray Wren paper was in press), with males having different categories of song (series of single tonal notes as well as more complex phrases, both of which are repeated and increase in amplitude through the course of the song), and duets formed by females joining in with complex phrases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Mann <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>et al. </i>classified both <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>leucopogon</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>thoracicus</i> as Style 9, and I would strongly agree with that classification.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>It is also interesting that both <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>leucopogon</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>thoracicus</i> show some ecological similarities to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i>, in that all three species tend to forage mostly in low or mid-level vine tangles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>Molecular analysis may ultimately show that <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i> isn t particularly close to any of the other South American  <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Thryothorus</i> , but I do find it interesting that ecologically and vocally, it is closer to <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>thoracicus &amp; leucopogon</i>, which molecular data would place in <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>Cantorchilus</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-family:Arial'> When all is said and done, I have to vote YES on recognizing <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Cantorchilus</i> along with <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> and <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryophilus</i>, with the recognition that we may end up moving some of the constituent species between genera as more molecular and vocal data become available (especially as regards <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>griseus</i>). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>Comments from Cadena</span></u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none'><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family: Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica;mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>409-411. YES to all three proposals. I think we made a mistake when considering proposal 219. Back then, the discussion led to rejection of the proposal because committee members disagreed on whether one should recognize one or three genera for the South American &quot;<i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Thryothorus</i>&quot;. This implied that we have maintained a genus that has been convincingly shown not to be monophyletic (owing to the position of <i style='mso-bidi-font-style: normal'>ludovicianus</i>).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> When discussing proposal 219, I tried to emphasize that the three genera proposed by Mann et al., and now endorsed by Donegan and Barker in these proposals, are strongly supported clades. This suggests that one cannot go wrong by giving names to these groups. In contrast, support for the monophyly of a clade formed by all three proposed genera to the exclusion of other wren genera is nonexistent. Therefore, I contend that recognizing a broad <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> is untenable with the evidence at hand. I would also like to emphasize that even if the three clades turn out to form a monophyletic group, a classification that ranks each of them at the genus level would be stable (i.e. monophyly of the group would not require making any further changes). In contrast, if we adopt a broad <i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'>Pheugopedius</i> as suggested by committee members before, and this genus turns out not to be monophyletic (note that the molecular data point in this direction), we will need to revisit the classification of the group once again, leading to instability.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;mso-bidi-font-family:Helvetica; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> Finally, it is nice to see that there is some evidence from vocalizations, etc. that aids with the diagnoses of the new proposed genera. However, I think that this should not be a requirement to justify changes in situations like this: solid phylogenetic analyses tell us that our current taxonomy is inconsistent with evolutionary history, so we need to change it. It would be nice if all named groups had phenotypic diagnoses, but I believe that it is more important that they represent monophyletic groups. As Kevin said, we might end up needing to move a few species between genera as data accrue in the future, but this is fine. Let's act based on what we already know. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 15.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:"Century Gothic"'>Comments from Jaramillo</span></u><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 15.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:"Century Gothic"'>:  </span><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:Arial;mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'> Proposal </span><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>408. Change linear order of current <i>Thryothorus </i>wrens (II)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight: bold'>Yes &#8211; this appears to better fit molecular, as well as behavioural data sets. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'>Proposal </span><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>409. Recognize genus <i>Pheugopedius </i>(II)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight: bold'>Yes &#8211; this one is clear based on the data. </span><span style='font-family:Arial;font-weight:normal'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'>Proposal </span><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>410. Recognize genus <i>Thryophilus </i>(II)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'>Yes &#8211; Again, this seems to be the right course of action based on molecular data, morphology and voice. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'>Proposal </span><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>411. Recognize genus <i>Cantorchilus </i>(II)</span><span style='font-family:Arial; font-weight:normal'><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoTitle align=left style='text-align:left'><span style='font-family: Arial;font-weight:normal'>Yes &#8211; This was the most problematic one for me. What I found most helpful were the comments by Gary Stiles and then Kevin Zimmer in the argument for whether we should recognize a genus based entirely on molecular characters. The clarification came in how the vocal data is viewed, and I think that Kevin really hit the nail on the head. The vocal data is there and they duet and vocalize in a different way, consistently within each genus, but it is very difficult to describe properly. It is described awkwardly but in print in the Mann paper, so on the whole I am cautious but believe that a yes vote is the way to go on this. Voice is incredibly important in wrens, and in a rather complex manner. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-AR style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Arial'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> </div> </body> </html>