4.7 Article

Multi-locus phylogenetic analysis of Old World chats and flycatchers reveals extensive paraphyly at family, subfamily and genus level (Aves: Muscicapidae)

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 57, 期 1, 页码 380-392

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2010.07.008

关键词

Passeriformes; Muscicapoidea; Muscicapidae; Turdidae; Cytochrome b; Lactate dehydrogenase intron 3; Ornithine decarboxylase introns 6 and 7; Myoglobin intron 2

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The chats and flycatchers (Muscicapidae) represent an assemblage of 275 species in 48 genera. Defining natural groups within this assemblage has been challenging because of its high diversity and a paucity of phylogenetically informative morphological characters. We assessed the phylogenetic relationships of 124 species and 34 genera of Muscicapidae, and 20 species of Turdidae, using molecular sequence data from one mitochondrial gene and three nuclear loci, in total 3240 bp. Bayesian and maximum likelihood analyses yielded a well-resolved tree in which nearly all basal nodes were strongly supported. The traditionally defined Muscicapidae, Muscicapinae and Saxicolinae were paraphyletic. Four major clades are recognized in Muscicapidae: Muscicapinae, Niltavinae (new family-group name), Erithacinae and Saxicolinae. Interesting relationships recovered by this analysis include: (i) a clade comprising the 'blue' fly-catcher genera Niltava, Cyornis, Cyanoptila and Eumyias and some species of Rhinomyias; (ii) the position of Erithacus rubecula in a clade of otherwise exclusively African species; (iii) a close relationship between the shortwing Heinrichia calligyna and the flycatcher Rhinomyias insignis; (iv) a sister-relationship between forktails Enicurus and whistling thrushes Myophonus; and (v) a sister relationship of Ficedula and the 'chats' Monticola, Phoenicurus, Saxicola and Oenanthe. A high number of traditionally defined genera was found to be paraphyletic or polyphyletic. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据