Download Change linear sequence of genera in Psittacidae

Proposal (386) to South American Classification Committee
Change linear sequence of genera in Psittacidae
Effect on SACC: This moves the positions of several genera in our current
linear sequence.
Background: Our current linear sequence is the product largely of historical
momentum and interpretations of comparative morphology. Fortunately,
two recent gene-based phylogenies corroborate or are consistent with
much of the traditional sequence. This proposal addresses the minor
conflicts with these new studies.
New data: Tavares et al. (2006) sequenced 8 genes, mitochondrial and
nuclear, for a total of almost 6400 bp. Their taxon sampling included 25 of
30 genera of Neotropical parrots. The well-supported nodes that affect our
sequence are
• Deroptyus and Pionites are sisters (100% Bayesian support, 100% ML
bootstrap support)
• Myiopsitta and Brotogeris are sisters (100% Bayesian support, 100%
ML bootstrap support)
• Nannopsittaca and Bolborhynchus (lineola) are sisters (100%
Bayesian support, 100% ML bootstrap support)
Wright et al. (2008) also sampled sequenced 3900+ bp of mitochondrial
and nuclear genes, including a different set of genes from Tavares et al.,
and included 23 genera of Neotropical parrots plus 46 from elsewhere.
Therefore, the results of this study represent a largely independent
assessment. Their results were impressively concordant with those of
Tavares et al., namely:
• Deroptyus and Pionites are sisters (99% ML bootstrap support)
• Myiopsitta and Brotogeris are sisters (100% ML bootstrap support)
They also found that:
• Nannopsittaca and Touit are sisters (100% ML bootstrap support)
However, they did not sample Bolborhynchus, and Tavares et al. did not
have Touit, so this is not a conflict. Nannopsittaca and Touit are adjacent in
our linear sequence.
And also found that:
• Leptosittaca is sister to Diopsittaca + Guarouba (84% ML bootstrap
support), and is not close to Aratinga, with which it is frequently
associated
Analysis and Recommendation:
To make our linear sequence correspond to the best available hypotheses
on the relationships within the family requires only minor changes, namely:
1. move Deroptyus from its second-to-last position to immediately
following Pionites
2. move Myiopsitta downward to follow Brotogeris
3. move Bolborhynchus (plus presumed close relatives Psilopsiagon)
downward to precede Nannopsittaca + Touit
4. move Leptosittaca upward to follow Guarouba
The resulting sequence is consistent with the phylogenetic hypotheses
above, and other than the placement Deroptyus, the changes are minor. I
recommend a YES on this one – it doesn’t get much better than two
concordant independent data sets.
Lit Cit
TAVARES, E. S., A. J. BAKER, S. L. PEREIRA, AND C. Y. MIYAKI. 2006.
Phylogenetic relationships and historical biogeography of Neotropical parrots
(Psittaciformes: Psittacidae: Arini) inferred from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA
Sequences. Systematic Biology 55: 454470.
WRIGHT, T. F., E. R. SCHIRTZINGER, T. MATSUMOTO, J. R. EBERHARD, G. R.
GRAVES, J. J. SANCHEZ, S. CAPELLI, H. MULLER, J. SCHARPEGGE, G. K.
CHAMBERS, AND R. C. FLESICHER. 2008. A multilocus molecular phylogeny
of the parrots (Psittaciformes): support for a Gondwanan origin during the
Cretaceous. Molecular Biology & Evolution 25: 2141-2156.
Van Remsen, November 2008
Comments solicited from Tim Wright: “I support the proposed changes to
the linear sequence of Neotropical parrot genera in the SACC. As detailed
in the proposal, the changes would bring the linear sequence in line with
the recent independent molecular phylogenies by Tavares et al and Wright
et al. that show similar topologies.”
Comments from Stiles: “YES. Again, massive multigene data from two
independent studies agree, so I can see no reason not to adopt these
changes.”
Comments from Nores: “YES, aunque pienso que Forpus debería ser
incluido entre Pionopsitta y Touit. Aunque esta relación no tiene fuerte
soporte, tampoco la tiene la que agrupa Myiopsitta con Brotogeris,
Nannopsittaca y Touit.”
Comments from Zimmer: “YES. Two concordant, independent data sets
make the case that this is the best arrangement.”
Comments from Jaramillo: “YES – I see no conflicts and no surprises here
really. It is good to have large datasets that are concordant as these are.”
Comments from Pacheco: "YES. Bem suportado por dois trabalhos
independentes.”