Furnariida II

Passerines

The 44 Orders

Paleognaths

Galloanserae

Metaves

Pelecanae

Charadriae

Passerae

Grallariidae: Ant-pittas

4 genera, 51 species Not HBW Family

Fenwick's Antpitta / Urrao Antpitta, Grallaria fenwickorum, was first formally described by Barrera and Bartels (2010). They suggested the name Fenwick's Antpitta. It appears to be closely related to the Brown-banded Antpitta, Grallaria milleri. Shortly thereafter, another description was published by Carantón and Certuche (2010), who originally discovered the bird. They proposed the name Urrao Antpitta, Grallaria urraoensis. Not surprisingly, there is some controvery surrounding this species. I won't further comment on that. My understanding is that fenwickorum has priority by ICZN rules. For the present I'm using both English names until one becomes established.

Rhinocryptidae: Tapaculos

12 genera, 56 species HBW-8

The overall structure of the Rhinocryptidae is a combination of Maurício et al., 2008, Moyle et al. (2009), and Ericson et al. (2010). Only Ericson et al. examined enough taxa to accurately place Psilorhamphus. It is clear from both Ericson et al. and Moyle et al. that Liosceles through Teledromas form a clade (clade 1), as do Merulaxis through Scytalopus (clade 2). What is not clear is where the Scelorchilus/Pteroptochos goes. Moyle et al. place it sister to clade 2, while Ericson et al. prefer a tree with it sister to clade 1. In fact, when you look inside Ericson et al. to examine the individual gene trees, one places it in clade 1, one places it sister to clade 2, and the third puts it in a polytomy with clades 1 and 2. I don't think there is enough information to decide the issue, and have left it unresolved by putting Scelorchilus/Pteroptochos in a trichotomy with clades 1 and 2.

In version 2.04, the White-breasted and Bahia Tapaculos were moved out of Scytalopus into a new genus, Eleoscytalopus (see Maurício et al., 2008). The Diamantina Tapaculo was added in 2.05. The composition of Scytalopus is currently very contentious. The SACC discussion of the Diamantina Tapaculo demonstrates home complex the issues are.

The Rock Tapaculo, Scytalopus petrophilus, was noted by Bornschein et al. (2007) and included in the genetic analysis of Mata et al. (2009). It was formally described by Whitney et al. (2010). The names of these taxa are in dispute, with some (Raposo et al., 2006, 2008) contending that speluncae does not apply to the Mouse-colored Tapaculo, but that it may apply to petrophilus. Raposo et al. (2006) introduced the alternate name notorius for the Mouse-colored Tapaculo. Maurício et al. (2010) argue in favor of the standard treatment, which is followed by the SACC and here.

Formicariidae: Ant-thrushes

2 genera, 11 species HBW-8

Furnariidae: Ovenbirds

73 genera, 298 species HBW-8

Furnariidae At the family level, the taxonomy is bascially the same as SACC, with the Dendrocolaptidae (woodcreepers) folded into the Furnariidae. This was necessary because the woodcreepers are nested within the Furnariidae. If they were separated, the Furnariidae would no longer be monophyletic. The SACC has introduced three subfamilies to reflect this: Sclerurinae (leaftossers and miners), Furnariinae (ovenbirds), and Dendrocolaptinae (woodcreepers). I arrange them as Sclerurinae, Dendrocolaptinae, Furnariiane because Furnariiane is much larger than Dendrocolaptinae.

However, there are complications with Xenops. According to some genes it is sister to Dendrocolaptinae, while others put it sister to Furnariinae (see Fjeldså et al., 2005, 2007; Irestedt et al., 2009b; Moyle et al., 2009b). Fjeldså et al. (2005) tell a nice story that makes Xenops somewhat analogous to a piculet. I have some sympathy for this argument as they sometimes remind me of piculets. Moreover, the nuclear RAG-1 and RAG-2 genes that Moyle et al. rely on may change too slowly to resolve all of the find details of the tree. On the other hand, the cytochrome b tree in Fjeldså et al. (2005) puts Xenops with the Furnariinae. Fjeldså et al. (2007) uses more genes and still finds Xenops near the woodcreepers. Irestedt et al. (2009b) agree in their overall tree, but the is considerable disagreement among the individual gene trees. Given the conflicting results, I think the best course of action is to put Xenops in its own subfamily between Dendrocolaptinae and Furnariiane pending further information.

The other complication with Xenops is that the Rufous-tailed Xenops does not belong in Xenops (Moyle et al., 2009b; Irestedt et al., 2009b). Fortunately, there is an available genus name: Microxenops (Chapman 1914). Accordingly, the Rufous-tailed Xenops becomes Microxenops milleri and moves to Pygarrhichadini.

Once we get below the subfamily level, we abandon the SACC order. The genera within the Furnariinae and Dendrocolaptinae are arranged quite differently than in the SACC list. The list here is a synthesis of Chesser et al. (2007), Fjeldså et al. (2005, 2007), Gonzalez and Wink (2008), Irestedt et al. (2004a, 2006a, 2009b), Moyle et al. (2009b), and Claramunt et al. (2010). The overall arrangement is driven by the recent papers by Irestedt et al. (2009b) and Moyle et al. (2009b).

Dendrocolaptinae We turn to the woodcreepers first. Both Irestedt et al. (2009b) and Moyle et al. (2009b) can be read as concur that there are three clades (A, B, and C on the diagram), plus Glyphorynchus (Wedge-billed Woodcreeper). They agree on the membership and relative position of the three clades (A sister to B plus C), but disagree on the position of Glyphorynchus. Irestedt et al. put it basal to the three clades, while Moyle et al. have it sister to B plus C. I've compromised by placing it in a basal position, but leave the question unresolved by making it a basal trichotomy with clade A and the combined B plus C. Glyphorynchus and A together are sometimes characterized as “intermediate”, meaning between the other woodcreepers and the rest of Furnariidae, while B and C are sometimes referred to as “strong-billed” (e.g., HBW-8).

Within clade A, Deconychura has been split into two (Derryberry et al., 2010a). As a result the Spot-throated Woodcreeper is now Certhiasomus stictolaemus. It takes the basal position in clade A.

The strong-billed woodcreepers divide into a mostly heavy-billed group (B) and a clade contained the curved-billed species, including scythebills (C). In clade B, there's some disagreement about the placement of Dendrocolaptes. Irestedt et al. (2009b) sample more taxa, so I follow them. The Greater Scythebill, formerly Campylorhamphus pucherani, turn out to be sister to the Scimitar-billed Woodcreeper, Drymornis bridgesii. Claramunt et al. (2010) established the new genus Drymotoxeres for it.

As far as overall structure of ovenbird subfamily goes, there are two important disagreement points—the positions of Berlepschia and the Furnariini. There's stronger support for in Irestedt et al.'s tree for the location of the Furnariini, and I follow that. There are hints that Berlepschia is not so well placed by Irestedt et al., so I follow Moyle et al. in that case. It's important to note that there is agreement on composition of the major clades. What disagreement there is concerns how they fit together, and in a few cases the internal organization of the clades.

My version starts with Berlepschia by itself at the base of the ovenbird subfamily. I distinguish this and the major clades within the ovenbirds by giving them tribal rank.

The second change from AOU-SACC is that Berlepschia is followed by another small tribe, Pygarrhichadini. Next comes Philydorini, which contains many of the traditional Philydorinae. It's followed by the Margarornini, which has been separated from the traditional Philydorinae. Then come the Furnariini and Synallaxini, which are respectively similar to the traditional Furiniinae and Synallaxinae.

There have also been some changes within these groups, sometimes involving reoganized genera.

The genus Upucerthia has been divided into 4 four parts (Chesser et al., 2007; Fjeldså et al. 2007). Two species are moved to Ochetorhynchus (in Pygarrhichadini), which also absorbs Chilia and Eremobius; two others form the new genus Tarphonomus (Chesser et al., 2007); U. serrana is placed in the new genus Geocerthia (Chesser et al., 2009); the rest remain in Upucerthia. The last three genera remain with the Furnariini.

This is not the only change in the Furnariini. The arrangement of Cinclodes species follows Sanín et al. (2009). They presented evidence for splitting the Bar-winged Cinclodes, Cinclodes fuscus, into three species. Jaramillo (2003) suggested the English names Buff-winged Cinclodes for Cinclodes fuscus and Cream-winged Cinclodes for Cinclodes albiventris. SACC has named Cinclodes albidiventris Chestnut-winged Cinclodes. The Chestnut-winged Cinclodes is the northern group, with a range extending into NW Peru (Cajamarca and Piura). It includes subspecies heterurus and oreobates, in addition to albidiventris. The central species is the Cream-winged Cinclodes, ranging from N Peru (Amazonas) to N Chile (Antofagasta) and NW Argentina (La Rioja). It apparently includes the isolated subspecies riojanus, rufus, and yzurietaeof NW Argentina, as well as tucumanus and albiventris. The southern Buff-winged Cinclodes is then monotypic.

There are also changes in the Synallaxini. For example, Des Murs's Wiretail, formerly Sylviorthorhynchus desmursii, has been moved to the genus Leptasthenura.

The biggest changes in the Synallaxini involve the genera Asthenes, Oreophylax, and Schizoeaca. Here the usual generic limits do not reflect the gene tree. The recent paper by Derryberry et al. (2010b) has done much to straighten out the situation. Four of the Asthenes, humicola, patagonica, steinbachi, and cactorum, do not really belong to the group. Derryberry et al. (2010b) created the new genus Pseudasthenes for this clade. They are more closely related to Spartonoica and Pseudoseisura (Derryberry et al., 2010b; Fjeldså et al., 2007; Gonzalez and Wink, 2008; Irestedt et al., 2009b). This is a bit surprising as cactorum has been considered a subspecies of modesta, which is actually not a close relative.

The remaining species of the Asthenes, Oreophylax, and Schizoeaca group form a clade. Derryberry et al. (2010b) suggest treating them all as Asthenes, and I now follow that here.

There are 3 or 4 branches of Asthenes. The basal branch includes dorbignyi, baeri, and probably berlepschi. All of these have previously been considered part of a superspecies. Another supposed member of that group, luizae, appears to form a separate branch that is closer to the other Asthenes than to the dorbignyi superspecies.

The remaining species of Asthenes are in two clades. The first runs from hudsoni to modesta. The other, which is comprised of the remaining Asthenes, includes the species formerly placed in Oreophylax and /Schizoeaca. Some of the relationships here are rather surprising as all of the old Schizoeaca are sometimes considered conspecific, and because of the geographic separation between the Andean Schizoeaca and Oreophylax of SE Brazil.

At the species level, the situation with the Cocoa (Xiphorhynchus susurrans), Buff-throated (X. guttatus), and Lafresnaye's (X. guttatoides) Woodcreepers unsettled (see Aleixo, 2002). The nominate race of guttatus seems more closely related to at least part of susurrans than to the rest of guttatus, with guttatoides (inc. eytoni) more distant. How all of the subspecies fit together remains unclear. Five different groups have sometimes been considered full species, but the information just isn't there to make an accurate call on this.

Sclerurinae: Leaftossers and Miners

Dendrocolaptinae: Woodcreepers

Xenopinae: Xenops

Furnariinae: True Ovenbirds

Furnariinae

Berlepschiini: Palmcreeper

Pygarrhichadini

Philydorini: Foliage-gleaners, Treehunters

Margarornini: Barbtails and Treerunners

Furnariini

Synallaxini: Spinetails

Previous Page Next Page