Proposal (491) to South American Classification Committee
Change linear sequence of orders for Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, and Cariamiformes
491A. Falconiformes and Psittaciformes
Background: In the current SACC list and practically all previous publications, these two orders are listed separately and far from Passeriformes: Falconiformes before Gruiformes, and Psittaciformes after Columbiformes. However, there is now substantial phylogenetic evidence for the relationship between the two groups and Passeriformes (Ericson et al. 2006, Hackett et al. 2008). Hackett et al. pointed out: "One of the most unexpected findings was the sister relationship between Passeriformes and Psittaciformes (node A, Fig. 2), with Falconidae (falcons) sister to this clade. This relationship varied slightly among analyses and gene-jackknifing (Fig. 1), yet the close relationship between passerines with parrots and/or falcons appeared consistently."
Recommendation: I recommend altering the position of the Falconiformes and Psittaciformes and placing them side-by-side before the Passeriformes:
I vote YES to this proposal.
Ericson, P.G.P., Anderson, C.L., Britton, T., Elzanowski, A., Johansson, U.S., Källersjö, M., Ohlson, J.I., Parsons, T.J., Zuccon, D., and Mayr, G. 2006. Diversification of Neoaves: integration of molecular sequence data and fossils. Biol. Lett. 2 543-547.
Hackett, S.J, Kimball, R.T., Reddy, S., Bowie, R.C.K., Braun, E.L., Braun, M.J., Chojnowski, J.L., Cox, W.A., Han, K., Harshman, J., Huddleston, C.J., Marks, B.D., Miglia, K.J., Moore, W.S., Sheldon, F.H., Steadman, D.W., Witt, C.C., and Yuri, T. 2008. A phylogenomic study of birds reveals their evolutionary history. Science. 320 1760.
Manuel Nores, July 2011
When asked to comment on 491, Keith Barker sent Remsen the following:
“If those rearrangements are to be made, then seriemas should be moved near these taxa as well. Although the relationship isn't strongly supported in the Hackett et al. tree, it receives moderate support, and it is corroborated by Ericson et al. 2006 (Biol. Lett. 2:543), where it receives >=0.95 posterior probability (for whatever that's worth).
“I hear that more recent analyses increase support for a parrot/passerine relationship, and this seems to be supported by "whole genome" shotgun sequencing (Nabholz et al. 2011, MBE 28:2197) so these two taxa should definitely be the last two. Based on current results, I would probably put Seriemas then falcons just before parrots and passerines.”
Comments from Pacheco:
“A. YES. Atendendo aos resultados alcanćados por trźs filogenias independemente implementadas.
“B. YES. A nova posićčo do recém reconhecido Cariamiformes representa um avanćo ao conhecimento.”
Comments from Jaramillo:
“A. YES. The data are strong and consistent for putting Falconiformes and Psittaciformes before Passeriformes.
“B. YES. Although not as strong and consistent as data for part A of this, the burden of proof is on those who want to continue considering the Cariamidae as part of the Gruiformes. Furthermore, once familiar with Cariamidae in life, they are very unlike anything in the Gruiformes; they really are the leftover of the terrorbirds!”
Comments from Zimmer: “YES and YES for reasons stated in both proposals. The evidence supporting the first change seems strong, and I second Alvaro’s comments with regard to any relationship between the Cariamidae and the Gruiformes.”