Hi Rob and Robin
The Stiller paper is definitely state-of-the-art. There are still a few families missing, and evidence that some should be lumped as they are part of a very recent diversification.
The big diagrams in the supplementary information also use family names that have been split in earlier works. There is a tractable rendition of this big phylogeny presented over several web pages at
http://www.jboyd.net/Taxo/changes.html
As for penguins, I think a chief conclusion of the Stiller paper is that most Orders of birds emerged about the same time, after the asteroid impact got rid of the non-bird dinosaurs,
so penguins are about as old as the parrots. Their data suggest that there were three groups that survived beyond the impact (a proto-ratite, a proto-fowl (ducks and pheasants), and a proto-rest of the birds. There is some evidence that the common ancestor
of flamingos and grebes was also a survivor. However, we have known for a long-time that proto-ratites were more like tinamous than emus and ostriches, and have evolved into hulking great flightless birds more than once.
Cheers
Andrew Cockburn
From:
Canberrabirds <> on behalf of Rob Geraghty via Canberrabirds <>
Date: Sunday, 7 July 2024 at 2:58 PM
To: Robin Hide <>
Cc: Canberrabirds <>
Subject: Re: [Canberrabirds] The genetic tree of birds
Thanks, Robin. I'd need to spend quote a bit of time working out the various families, but it's interesting to see the Nightjars placed with Swifts and Hummingbirds as suggested in Wikipedia. From the circular graphic, it looks like Australaves
including songbirds were the last to appear, but split into more species than the others combined. It makes sense that Ostriches, which most resemble bipedal dinosaurs might be the oldest. I'm surprised to see Penguins evolving before most terrestrial birds.
On Sun, 7 July 2024, 13:23 Robin Hide, <> wrote:
This perhaps useful?
Robin
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07323-1#Sec5
and
Supplementary information:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07323-1#Sec37
Josefin Stiller, S. F., Al-Aabid Chowdhury, Iker Rivas-González, David A. Duchêne et al. (2024). “Complexity of avian evolution revealed by family-level genomes”.
Nature 01 April 2024, 629: 851–60
:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07323-1#Sec5
Supplementary information:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07323-1#Sec37
Abstract:
Despite tremendous efforts in the past decades, relationships among main avian lineages remain heavily debated without a clear resolution. Discrepancies have been attributed to diversity of species sampled,
phylogenetic method, and the choice of genomic regions 1–3. Here, we address these issues by analyzing genomes of 363 bird species 4 (218 taxonomic families, 92% of total). Using intergenic regions and coalescent methods, we present a well-supported tree but
also a remarkable degree of discordance. The tree confirms that Neoaves experienced rapid radiation at or near the Cretaceous–Paleogene (K–Pg) boundary. Sufficient loci rather than extensive taxon sampling were more effective in resolving difficult nodes.
Remaining recalcitrant nodes involve species that challenge modeling due to extreme GC content, variable substitution rates, incomplete lineage sorting, or complex evolutionary events such as ancient hybridization. Assessment of the impacts of different genomic
partitions showed high heterogeneity across the genome. We discovered sharp increases in effective population size, substitution rates, and relative brain size following the K–Pg extinction event, supporting the hypothesis that emerging ecological opportunities
catalyzed the diversification of modern birds. The resulting phylogenetic estimate offers novel insights into the rapid radiation of modern birds and provides a taxon-rich backbone tree for future comparative studies.
Is there any book which describes what has been learned about the genetic tree of birds? I'd love to see a visualisation of the various bird families and when they evolved. I was
surprised to learn today that Australian Owlet-nightjars and American Nighthawks aren't closely related. I've been told that Lyrebirds and Bristlebirds are ancient, but I don't know if the genetic evidence backs it up.
The book "Where song began" suggests that the genes indicate songbirds evolving in Australia. I've seen genetic maps for humans spreading out from Africa, but not birds spreading
across the world.
|
ATT00001.txt
Description: ATT00001.txt
|
