Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Integumentary Characters and theIntegumentary Characters and the
Phylogenetics of Galliform BirdsPhylogenetics of Galliform Birds
byby
Ureka Summer ProgramUreka Summer Program
UCD/NMINH Ireland UCD/NMINH Ireland
20052005
Paulo C. Pulgarín-RPaulo C. Pulgarín-R
Order Galliformes“Chicken-like” birds – “Landfowl” – “Gamebirds”
Including: Cracids, Megapods, Turkey, Grouse, New
World and Old World Quails and Guineafowls
~280 species (816 taxa)
77 genus
Extremely different life histories, plumage variation
and distribution, voice, behavior…
Previous hypothesis
Megapods &
Cracids
New Word Quails
Guineafowl
Groose,
Pheasants
& relatives
Sibley & Ahlquist 1990
ANSERIFORMES
DUCKS,
GEESE &
SCREAMERS
CRACIDAE
CRACIDS
MEGPODIIDAE
MEGAPODES
NUMIDIDAE
GUINEAFOWLS
MELEGRIDIDAE
TURKEYS
TETRAONIDAE
GROUSE
PHASIANINAE
PHEASANTS,
JUNGLE FOWLS &
PEACOCK/ARGUS
PHEASANTS
ODONTOPHORIDAE
NEW WORLD
QUAILS
PERDICINAE
PARTRIDGES,
OLD-WORLD
QUAILS,
FRANCOLINS &
SPURFOWLS
PHASIANIDAE
OUTGROUP Dyke et al. 2003
Aims of the research project
Are the feathers (at a microscopic level) informative
to resolve galliform evolutionary relationships?
Are Dove’s (2000) list of characters useful to understand
galliform interrelationships?
Taxon sampling
INGROUP
6 Families (1 lacking)*
43 Genera (55%)*
56 Species (20%)*
OUTGROUP
3 Anseriformes
1 Cuculiformes
* Taxon representatives follow HBW: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. eds. (1994). Handbook of the birds of the world.Vol 2. New World Vultures to Guineafowl. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
Variation in distal proportions of the
barbule (tip cells)
Tetrao urogallus
(Tetraoidae)
Short prongs
Colinus virginianus (Odontophoridae)
Long prongs
Oreophrasis derbianus (Cracidae)
Sword tip cell
Bonasa umbellus
Strap-like base cell pigmentation
pattern
Node pigmentation shape
Colinus virginianus
Colinus virginianus
Shape and longitude of basal barbule cell
Colinus virginianus
Rings shape and distribution
Cladistic (Parsimony) analysis
using Dove’s 2000 list of
characteres:
A heuristic and ratchet search
56 taxa and 31 characters
63 trees equally parsimonious
157 length
CI: 2.0 – RI: 6.0
Aythya
Branta
Lei
Oreoder
Abu
Tragbly
Guttplu
Catrewa
Acryvul
Numid
Ortaven
Ammo
Bonasu
Bonasb
Anseranas
Opisto
Megar
Lerw
Phascol
Gallolu
Tetra2
Chryy
Dendrob
Ithacru
Mega
Dendrao
Oreopic
Chryx
Cotu
Lagolx
Lagoly
Lagoru
Tetra1
Argus
Phasi
Pavo
Alect
Franc
Lyru
Perdi
Odontca
Colli
Penepur
Craxdub
Nummele
Nummitr
Polybic
Galllas
Gallsma
Pip
Megafre
Megadyp
Megacep
Cathela
Megapods and Cracids
Other groups
Groose, Numids…
Outgroup (Ducks, Goose)
Phasianidae:
Nodes distinctively pigmented
Nodes more expanded at basal than distal parts
Nodes with many spines
Ausence of developed hooks at Subpennaceous region
Large prongs
In brief
Odontophoridae:
Tip cells with several spines
Pigment at nodes very distinctive
High density of basal “ringed barbules”
In brief
Numididae:
High node density
Enlarged flat prong
Node mophology very homogeneus
Abundance of “ringed barbules”
No strongly pigmented
In brief
Megapodiidae and Cracidae:
Huge and expanded nodes
Absence “ringed barbules”
Lack of distinctive pigments
“Enlarged” and characteristic hook morphology at SP region
In brief
In brief
Tetraonidae:
Short and uniform prongs
Oblong nodes through barbule
Nodes highly pigmented
Subpennaceous region reduced in some species
Are the feathers (at a microscopic level) informative
to resolve galliform evolutionary relationships?
Yes, feathers contain enough historical information to be used to
formulate hypotheses of evolutionary relationships amongst
galliforms
Most of the ‘traditional’ galliform groupings can be recognized
using microscopic plumulaceous features
Further, microscopic feather characters may be reliable, and useful
traits, for resolving high-level bird systematics
Are Dove’s (2000) list of characters useful to
understand galliforms interrelationships?
No, Dove’s 2000 list of characters were not useful resolving
galliforms relationships, incongruence with former hypothesis and
lack of support
Characters need to be redefined in order to understand the
galliformes integumentary microscopic variation in a phylogenetic
context
Acknowledgements
Gareth Dyke and Julia Sigwart
Delphine Ledru, Eric Callaghan, Nigel Monaghan and Paolo
Viscardi
Carla Dove and Sara Bertelli
UCD Stuff and faculty
The UREKAN’s
(Adam, Alishia, Boris “the Big Fish”, Des, Hannah, Louise
“Cookie” and Musawenkosi)