Neoaves

From EvoWiki

There is some ambiguity regarding the definition of the group Neoaves. Sibley & Ahlquist (1988) recovered a basal divergence amongst neognathae birds between Galloanserae and all other neognathous, terming this latter clade "Neoaves." Later, however, Sibley & Ahlquist (1990), Sibley & Monroe (1990), Kurochkin (1995) and Rotthowe & Starck (1998) used the term Neoaves to refer to all neognathous birds, including the galloanserine assemblage. Most authors (e.g., Garcia-Moreno et al. 2003, Chubb 2004) have used Neoaves to refer to all neognathous birds exclusive of Galloanserae, and as this is the standard working definition of the taxon, it is thus followed here.

The higher level systematics of Neoaves, are largely unresolved. Most clades fall out in polytomy that both morphological and molecular analysis has largely been unable to resolve (e.g., Mayr et al. 2003). Few conclusions can soundly be reached, though there is mounting evidence to suggest caprimulgiform paraphyly (Mayr 2002a, Mayr et al. 2003, Mayr & Clarke 2003). A flamingo/grebe clade has been retrieved in several analyses (e.g., Mayr 2004), though the evidence supporting this hypothesis must be critically examined. Opisthocomidae has clustered with Gruiformes on the basis of several shared derived osteological characters (Mayr & Clarke 2003). Strigiformes + Accipitridae + Falconidae may constitute a monophyletic clade (e.g., Mayr et al. 2003, Mayr & Clarke 2003). Coraciiformes as classically defined (Leptosomidae, Coraciidae, Brachypteracidae, Phoeniculidae, Upupidae, Bucerotidae, Trogonidae, Alcedinidae, Meropidae, Todidae, and Momotidae) is not monophyletic (Mayr et al. 2003). Despite objections to the monophyly of Piciformes, (e.g., Olson 1983, Feduccia 1996), morphological and molecular evidence are congruent in indicating piciform monophyly (e.g., Mayr et al. 2003, Chubb 2004). Beyond this, little can be said for certain and indeed even some of the tentative consensus opinions enumerated herein, are open for further debate.

References

1. Chubb, A. 2004. New nuclear evidence for the oldest divergence among neognath birds: the phylogenetic utility of ZENK (i). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 30: 140-151.
2. Feduccia, A. 1996. The Origin and Evolution of Birds, First Edition. Yale University Press, New Haven.
3. Garcia-Moreno, J., Sorenson, M. D. & Mindell, D. P. 2003. Congruent avian phylogenies inferred from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Journal of Molecular Evolution 57: 27-37.
4. Kurochkin, E. 1995. Synopsis of Mesozoic birds and early evolution of class Aves. Archaeopteryx 13: 47-66.
5. Mayr, G. 2002a. Osteological evidence for paraphyly of the avian order Caprimulgiformes (nightjars and allies). J. Ornithol. 143: 82-97.
6. Mayr, G. 2004. Morphological evidence for sister group relationship between flamingos (Aves: Phoenicopteridae) and grebes (Podicipedidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 140: 157-169.
7. Mayr, G. & Clarke, J. 2003. The deep divergences of neornithine birds: a phylogenetic analysis of morphological characters. Cladistics 19: 527-553.
8. Mayr, G., Manegold, A., & Johansson, U. S. 2003. Monophyletic groups within 'higher land birds'--comparison of morphological and molecular data. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Research 41: 233-245.
9. Olson, S. L. 1983. Evidence for a polyphyletic origin of the Piciformes. Auk 100: 126-133.
10. Rotthowe, K. & Starck, J. M. 1998. Evidence for phylogenetic position of button quails (Turnicidae: Aves) among the Gruiformes. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 36: 39-51.
11. Sibley, C. G. & Ahlquist, J. E. 1990. Phylogeny and Classification of Birds: A Study in Molecular Evolution. Yale University Press, New Haven.
12. Sibley, C. G. & Monroe, B. L. 1990. Distribution and Taxonomy of the Birds of the World. Yale University Press, New Haven.
13. Sibley, C. G., Ahlquist, J. E. & Monroe, B. L. 1988. A classification of the living birds of the world based on DNA-DNA hybridization studies. Auk 105: 409-423.