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:
Falconiformes
Psittaciformes
Passeriformes
I vote YES to this proposal.
Literature Cited:
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
Note added by Remsen, Sep. 11: Additional support for
Psittaciformes-Passeriformes relationship found by Suh
et al. (2011).
491B. Cariamiformes
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.”
Because there is no support for our current position
of the Cariamiformes (arbitrarily residing between Eurypigifomes
and Charadriiformes as a holdover from its former position in Gruiformes), I
think we should also move the Cariamiformes to precede Falconiformes as per
above. At least there is some
support for that position (vs. plenty of support against its current position).
Van Remsen, July 2011
Comments from Pacheco:
“A .YES. Atendendo aos
resultados alcançados por três filogenias
independemente implementadas.
“B. YES. A nova posição do recém reconhecido Cariamiformes representa um avanço 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.”