Proposal (512) to South
American Classification Committee
Transfer genera from Emberizidae to
Thraupidae
Proposal:
If passed, this proposal would transfer a number of genera from Emberizidae
to Thraupidae.
Background:
For a decade or more, we’ve known from genetic data that many primarily
South American genera placed traditionally in the Emberizidae are actually
tanagers. Some we have already
transferred. This proposal seeks to move
the remaining genera, as follows (with supporting references in parentheses).
Porphyrospiza (1; also morphology – Tordoff 1954a)
Phrygilus (2, 3, 1, 4, 14)
Melanodera (4, 14)
Haplospiza (3, 1, 4, 14)
Idiopsar (4, 14)
Diuca (5, 1, 6, 4, 10)
Lophospingus (1, 6)
Poospiza (7, 2, 3, 1, 4, 11, 14)
Compsospiza (1, 7, 4)
Sicalis (5, 2, 3, 1, 10, 11, 14, 4)
Emberizoides (1, 4)
Embernagra (2, 3, 1, 4, 14)
Volatinia (2, 3, 1, 10, 11)
Sporophila (2, 3, 1; also morphology – Clark 1986, 11)
Oryzoborus (9 as related to/embedded within Sporophila, 10, 11, 14, 1, 2,
3)
Dolospingus (13)
Catamenia (2, 3, 1, 4, 11, 14)
Coryphospingus (2, 3, 1, 8, 12, 4)
Rhodospingus (8)
Gubernatrix (4)
Camarhynchus
(2, 3)
Certhidea (11, 2)
Coereba (11, 1, 2, 3, 5)
Euneornis (2, 3)
Geospiza (11, 12, 1, 2,
3)
Loxigilla (11, 14, 1, 2,
3)
Loxipasser (2, 3)
Melanospiza (2, 11, 3)
Melopyrrha (2, 3)
Pinaroloxias (11, 2)
Platyspiza (11, 2)
Tiaris (11, 12, 14, 1, 2, 3)
Parkerthraustes (1)
References (See SACC Bibliography for
full citations):
(1) Klicka et al. 2007
(2) Burns et al. 2002
(3) Burns et al. 2003
(4) Campagna et al. 2011
(5) Bledsoe 1988
(6) Sedano & Burns 2009
(7) Lougheed et al. 2000
(8) Burns & Racicot 2009
(9) Lijtmaer et al. 2004
(10) Sibley & Ahlquist 1990
(11) Sato et al. 2001
(12) Yuri & Mindell 2002
(13) Robbins et al. 2005
(14) Mauck & Burns 2009
Part A. In our opinion, the evidence is now
overwhelming for their transfer from Emberizidae to Thraupidae. A YES vote endorses the transfer. If the proposal passes, we’ll then work on a
linear sequence.
Part B. There are also a few genera for which there
are as yet no unpublished data. Given
their South American distribution and their supposed relationships to the
genera above, we recommend that they also be removed from Emberizidae and
placed Incertae Sedis until it can be confirmed to which family they belong.
Donacospiza
Piezorhina
Xenospingus
Incaspiza
Charitospiza
Coryphaspiza
Van
Remsen & Kevin Burns, November 2011
_______________________________________________________________________
Comments from Stiles:
“YES; the evidence is clearly overwhelming, and my only fear is that the
Thraupidae might displace Trochilidae as the second-largest strictly New World
family! Actually, this makes the radiation of the Thraupidae (which presumably
reached South America relatively late in the game) one of the most explosive on
record – a diversity only exceeded by the Tyrannidae, which have been around
considerably (?) longer! Interesting
implications for the evolution of frugivory (and coevolution with the many
kinds of fruits taken and dispersed) in South America. And going back to a question raised by Bob
Storer a while back, how do we now define a “tanager”? A further query: what about Saltator?”
Comments from Pacheco: “A – YES.
The evidence together is clearly satisfactory. B – YES. I also agree. At least, one reinforcing
point: the nest of Charitospiza, only
recently described, shown to be similar to that of Coryphospingus. See:http://www.ararajuba.org.br/sbo/ararajuba/artigos/Volume161/ara161not1.pdf”
Comments from Pérez: “A- YES. There is a large amount of published information that needs to
be incorporated into our classification. B- YES, hoping more information will
provide with relevant phylogenetic information to place these birds within the
oscine radiation. I am also intrigued by the absence of Saltator in the
list, but I think it will have to go into the Incertae Sedis category.”