Certhioidea

Passerines

Tyranni: Suboscines

Passeri: Oscines

Passerida

Sylvioidea
Muscicapoidea and allies
Passeroidea

The 44 Orders

Paleognaths

Galloanserae

Metaves

Pelecanae

Charadriae

Passerae

Certhioidea tree
Click for genus-level
Certhioidea tree

The new superfamily Certhioidea may be sister to the Muscicapoidea and may even be best treated as part of Muscicapoidea. For now, it is not really clear how the various groups that seem allied to Muscicapoidea fit together. Until this is clarified, I prefer to consider Certhioidea an independent superfamily within Passerida, but closely allied with Muscicapoidea. This all has only minor effects on the linear order, but it does affect the shape of the tree.

Following HBW, I've put the wallcreeper in a separate family. The rest is fairly solid, including the position of the nuthatches, and treatment of gnatcatchers and wrens are sister families.

I've placed Salpornis with the nuthatches instead of the creepers based on Johansson et al. (2008b).

Tichodromadidae: Wallcreeper

1 genus, 1 species HBW-13

Sittidae: Nuthatches

2 genera, 29 species HBW-13

Certhiidae: Treecreepers

1 genus, 9 species HBW-13

Polioptilidae: Gnatcatchers, Gnatwrens

3 genera, 15 species HBW-12

Troglodytidae: Wrens

20 genera, 86 species HBW-10

Except for Nannus, the wrens are confined to the Americas, where they are present pretty much everywhere south of the northern treeline. The overall arrangement is based on combined cytochrome b and β-fibrinogen analyses of Barker (2004) and Mann et al. (2006). Using only the cytochrome b gene leads to a rather different arrangement. I treat the three major clades as subfamilies: Salpinctinae, Troglodytinae, and Thryothorinae. It is not entirely certain whether Salpinctinae or Troglodytinae is the basal subfamily. I also have rather low confidence in the arrangement within Thryothorinae. The combined data indicate two major clades within Thryothorinae, but the details are somewhat shaky.

Following the taxonomic suggestions of Mann et al., I break Thryothorus into 4 genera: Thryothorus, Pheugopedius, Thryophilus, and Cantorchilus. The SACC failed to pass this, voting 4-4. The discussion indicates that a vote to split the narrow Thryothorus from the rest would have passed. It is clear that the core of Thryothorus does not belong with the rest and must be split. However, a two-way split leaves a broad Pheugopedius that is probably not monophyletic, so I have decided to go with the 4-way split. It is uncertain where the Gray Wren, Cantorchilus griseus, actually belongs. It may end up in a separate genus.

The wrens currently seem to be somewhat overlumped. The arrangement here includes several species that are not currently recognized by either of the AOU committees, although some are recognized in HBW-10 (Kroodsma and Brewer, 2005). The splits that go beyond any of these involve the Winter Wren, Troglodytes troglodytes. Based on Drovetski et al. (2004) and Toews and Irwin (2008), I've split it into 3 species: Pacific Wren, Winter Wren, and Eurasian Wren. These are placed in a new genus, Nannus. The Winter Wren, Nannus hiemalis, includes the subspecies hiemalis and pullus. The other North American subspecies are included in Pacific Wren, Nannus pacificus. Drovetski et al. included several Aleutian wrens in their analysis, and found that they grouped tightly with pacificus. I am presuming that all of the western subspecies will be close to pacificus. Toews and Irwin studied pacificus and hiemalis where their ranges overlap slightly along the northern British Columbia/Alberta boundary. They found evidence of a high degree of reproductive isolation, which prompts the split here. The eurasian races have not been as closely studies. Drovetski et al. found they form a monophyletic clade sister to Nannus hiemalis. Further, they found there are at least four separate clades that may deserve species rank: troglodytes/indigenus, hyrcanus, nipalensis, and fumigatus/dauricus. As you can see, many eurasian subspecies were not included. I prefer to wait for more information before further splitting the Eurasian Wren.

Among the Troglodytes house wrens I recognize several non-AOU species that Kroodsma and Brewer (2005) also split. Thus we have the North American Northern House Wren, Troglodytes aedon; the Mexican Brown-throated Wren, Troglodytes brunneicollis (which ranges into the mountains of SE Arizona); Cozumel Wren, Troglodytes beani; the Falklands endemic Cobb's Wren, Troglodytes cobbi, which the SACC is currently considering recognizing; and the South and Central American Southern House Wren, Troglodytes musculus. Exactly how these all relate is not clear (see Brumfield and Capparella, 1996, and Martínez Gómez et al., 2005). The Antillean races of the Southern House Wren may also deserve species rank.

I have followed Vázquez-Miranda et al. (2009) in splitting Rufous-backed Wren, Campylorhynchus capistratus, and Sclater's Wren, Campylorhynchus humilis, from Rufous-naped Wren, Campylorhynchus rufinucha. Although the IOC recognizes this split, the AOU NACC does not. C. capistratus includes nigricaudatus, and presumably xerophilum, nicaraguae, and castaneus. Vázquez-Miranda et al. also found that some of the subspecies of zonatus do not actually belong there, but further study is required to untangle that situation.

Kroodsma and Brewer (2005) include two more splits that I have not followed, splitting White-browed Wren, Thryothorus albinucha, from Carolina Wren, Thryothorus ludovicianus, and splitting Canebrake Wren, Cantorchilus zeledoni, from Plain Wren, Cantorchilus modestus. Although Mann et al. (2006) provide some supporting evidence for both splits, they do not recommend them at this time. In such cases, I generally follow AOU, and will do so here. Gonzalez et al. (2003) analyzed DNA from the Bay Wren, Cantorchilus nigricapillus. They found two major groupings, which could be split into Bay Wren, Cantorchilus castaneus (including odicus, reditus, and costaricensis), and the Black-capped Wren, Cantorchilus nigricapillus (including schottii and connectens).

Possible splits not followed include three in Cistothorus. The eastern and western Marsh Wrens, Cistothorus palustris, are vocally quite different. The same can be said about the northern and southern Sedge Wrens, Cistothorus platensis, where it is not clear exactly how many species are involved or what their limits are. This uncertainty is why they are treated as a single species. Finally, Apolinar's Wren, Cistothorus apolinari, may include two geographically separated species.

Finally, two of the Henicorhina Wood-Wrens are also candidates for future splits (Dingle et al., 2006). The White-breasted Wood-Wren, Henicorhina leucosticta, includes Andean, Chocó, and Central American groups, each of which may deserve species status. The Chocó (inornata) group is actually more closely related to the Bar-winged Wood-Wren, Henicorhina leucoptera. In this list, we currently consider it a subspecies of H. leucoptera. Finally, the Gray-breasted Wood-Wren, Henicorhina leucophrys, includes at least 3 clades which might be better considered as species.

Salpinctinae

Troglodytinae

Thryothorinae

Previous Page Next Page