Advertisement

Journal für Ornithologie

, Volume 140, Issue 2, pp 179–192 | Cite as

Relationships of some mannikins and waxbills in the estrildidae

  • Luis F. Baptista
  • Robin Lawson
  • Eleanor Visser
  • Douglas A. Bell
Article

Summary

There is disagreement as to the number of genera comprising the mannikins (Lonchurinae). Some authors recognize two to five of the following genera:Lonchura, Euodice, Padda, Spermestes andOdontospiza. Other authors have merged the last four taxa into the enlarged genusLonchura. We bring together data from downy plumes (neossoptiles), nestling palate markings, begging vocalizations, agonistic behaviour, courtship postures and starch gel electrophoresis of allozymes to solve these taxonomic problems. PAUP analysis of the combined data set indicates thatSpermestes andOdontospiza belong to a monophyletic clade separate fromEuodice, Padda andLonchura. We propose mergingOdontospiza withSpermestes, which suggests an African radiation of the group, and placing the generaPadda andEuodice in withLonchura, which represents a mostly Australasian radiation. The genusAmadina has been treated by some as a mannikin (Lonchurinae) and by others as a waxbill (Estrildinae). Our data indicate thatAmadina should be assigned to the estrildines rather than the lonchurines.Amadina's relatively large, mannikin-like conical bill is a result of convergence, probably reflecting selection pressure on bill shape associated with diet specializations.

Keywords

estrildid systematics allozymes behaviour morphology vocalizations 

Verwandtschaften einiger Nonnen und Prachtfinken innerhalb der Estrildidae

Zusammenfassung

Die eigentliche Zahl an Gattungen innerhalb der Nonnen (Lonchurinae) ist umstritten. Einige Autoren erkennen zwei bis fünf von den folgenden Gruppen an:Lonchura, Euodice, Padda, Spermestes, undOdontospiza. Letztere vier Gruppen sind von anderen Autoren in eine vergrößerteLonchura-Gattung vereinigt worden. Um diese taxonomischen Probleme zu lösen, präsentieren wir Daten an neossoptilen Daunenfedern, Rachenzeichnungen, Bettellautäußerungen, agonistischen Verhaltensweisen, Balzverhalten und Stärkegel-Elektrophorese von Proteinen. Eine PAUP (phylogenetische) Analyse aller Daten ergibt folgendes:Spermestes undOdontospiza gehören einer monophyletischen Clade an. Gleiches gilt für die GattungenEuodice, Padda undLonchura. Demzufolge schlagen wir vor, daßOdontospiza der GattungSpermestes, undPadda undEuodice der GattungLonchura, zugeordnet werden sollen. Damit stellt sichSpermestes als eine afrikanische, undLonchura als eine hauptsächlich australasiatische Radiation vor. Die GattungAmadina wird von einigen Autoren den Nonnen (Lonchurinae), von anderen den Eigentlichen Prachtfinken (Estrildinae) zugeordnet. Unsere Daten zeigen, daßAmadina den Estrildiden und nicht den Lonchurinen angehört. Der große kegelförmige, nonnenähnliche Schnabel vonAmadina ist aufgrund nahrungsbedingtem Selektionsdruck wohl durch Konvergenz zustande gekommen.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aebersold, P.B., Winans, G.A., Teel, D.J., Milner, G.B. & Utter, F.M. (1987): Manual for starch gel electrophoresis: A method for detection of genetic variation. U. S. Dept. Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin., National Marine Fisheries Service.Google Scholar
  2. Ayala, F.J., Powell, J.R., Tracy, M.L., Mourao, C.A. & Perez-Salas, S. (1972): Enzyme variability in theDrosophila willistoni group. IV. Genetics 70: 133–139.Google Scholar
  3. Baptista, L.F. (1973): On courtship displays and the taxonomic position of the Grey-headed Silverbill. Avicult. Mag. 79: 149–154.Google Scholar
  4. Baptista, L.F. & Atwood, A.L. (1980): Agonistic behaviour in the Java Finch. J. Ornithol. 122: 171–179.Google Scholar
  5. Baptista, L.F. & Horblit, H.M. (1990): The inheritance and loss of the straw display in estrildid finches. Avicult. Mag. 96: 141–152.Google Scholar
  6. Baptista, L.F. & Trail, P.W. (1988): On the origin of Darwin's finches. Auk 105: 663–671.Google Scholar
  7. Bentz, G.D. (1979): The appendicular myology and phylogenetic relationships of the Ploceidae and Estrildidae (Aves: Passeriformes). Bull. Carnegie Mus. Nat. Hist. No. 15: 1–25.Google Scholar
  8. Buth, D.G. (1984): The application of electrophoretic data in systematic studies. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 15: 501–522.Google Scholar
  9. Christidis, L. (1986): Chromosomal evolution within the family Estrildidae (Aves) I. The Poephilae. Genetica 71: 81–97.Google Scholar
  10. Christidis, L. (1987): Biochemical systematics within paleotropic finches (Aves: Estrildidae). Auk 104: 380–391.Google Scholar
  11. Clayton, J.W. & Tretiak, D.N. (1972): Amine-citrate buffers for pH control in starch-gel electrophoresis. J. Fish. Res. Board Canada 29: 1169–1172.Google Scholar
  12. Delacour, J. (1943): A revision of the subfamily Estrildinae of the family Ploceidae. Zoologica 28: 69–86.Google Scholar
  13. De Queiroz, A. & Lawson, R. (1994): Phylogenetic relationships of the garter snakes based on DNA sequence and allozyme variation. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 53: 209–229.Google Scholar
  14. Eisner, E. (1958): Bengalese Finch x Silverbill hybrids. Avicult. Mag. 64: 51–54.Google Scholar
  15. Fehrer, J. (1993): Interspezies-Kreuzungen bei cardueliden Finken und Prachtfinken. In: Scherer S. (ed.): Typen des Lebens. Berlin: 197–215.Google Scholar
  16. Felsenstein, J. (1985): Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783–791.Google Scholar
  17. Gahr, M., & Güttinger, H.-R. (1985): Korrelation zwischen der sexualdimorphen Gehirndifferenzierung und der Verhaltensausprägung bei Prachtfinken (Estrildidae). J. Ornithol. 126: 310.Google Scholar
  18. Gahr, M., & Güttinger, H.-R. (1986): Functional aspects of singing in male and femaleUraeginthus bengalus (Estrildidae). Ethology 72: 123–131.Google Scholar
  19. Glatthaar, R. & Ziswiler, V. (1971): Ontogenie und histologie der Rachenzeichnungen bei Prachtfinken, Estrildidae. Rev. suisse de Zoologie 78: 1222–1230.Google Scholar
  20. Goodwin, D. (1982): Estrildid Finches of the World. British Museum (Nat. Hist.) London.Google Scholar
  21. Grant, B.R. (1985): Selection on bill characters in a population of Darwin's finches:Geospiza conirostris on Isla Genovesa, Galapagos. Evolution 39: 523–532.Google Scholar
  22. Güttinger, H.-R. (1970): Zur Evolution von Verhaltensweisen und Lautäußerungen bei Prachtfinken (Estrildidae). Z. Tierpsychol. 27: 1011–1075.Google Scholar
  23. Güttinger, H.-R. (1976): Zur systematischen Stellung der GattungenAmadina, Lepidopygia undLonchura (Aves, Estrildidae). Bonn. Zool. Beitr. 27: 218–244.Google Scholar
  24. Harris, H. & Hopkinson, D.A. (1976): Handbook of Enzyme Electrophoresis in Human Genetics. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  25. Harrison, C.J.O. (1962): A Silverbill × Bengalese Finch hybrid. Avicult. Mag. 68: 30–33.Google Scholar
  26. Harrison, C.J.O. (1964): The taxonomic status of the African SilverbillLonchura cantans and the Indian SilverbillL. malabarica. Ibis 106: 462–468.Google Scholar
  27. Hillis, D.M. & Bull, J.J. (1993): An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42: 182–192.Google Scholar
  28. Immelmann, K. (1982): Australian Finches in Bush and Aviary. Sydney.Google Scholar
  29. Immelmann, K., Steinbacher, J. & Wolters, J.E. (1977): Vögel in Käfig und Voliere, Prachtfinken. Vol. II, Aachen.Google Scholar
  30. Kakizawa, R. & Watada, M. (1985): The evolutionary genetics of the Estrildidae. J. Yamashina Inst. Ornithol. 17: 143–158.Google Scholar
  31. Mabee, P.M. & Humphries, J. (1993): Coding polymorphic data: Examples from allozymes and ontogeny. Syst. Biol. 42: 166–181.Google Scholar
  32. Manchenko, G.P. (1994): Handbook of Detection of Enzymes on Electrophoretic Gels. Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  33. Marcus, M.B. (1970): A preliminary survey of the occurrence of neossoptiles in South African passeriform birds, with special reference to natal pteryloses. MS thesis, Univ. Pretoria.Google Scholar
  34. Mayr, E. (1968): The sequence of genera in the Estrildidae (aves). Breviora Mus. Comp. Zool. Vol. 287, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  35. Mickevich, M. F. & Johnson, M. (1976): Congruence between morphological and allozyme data in evolutionary influence and character evolution. Syst. Zool. 25: 260–270.Google Scholar
  36. Morris, D. (1958): The comparative ethology of grassfinches (Erythrurae) and mannikins (Amadinae). Proc. Zool. Soc. London 131: 389–439.Google Scholar
  37. Murphy, R.W. (1993): The phylogenetic analysis of allozyme data: Invalidity of coding alleles by presence/absence and recommended procedures. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 21: 25–38.Google Scholar
  38. Nicolai, J. (1964): Der Brutparasitismus der Viduinae als ethologisches Problem. Prägungsphänomene als Faktoren der Rassen- und Artbildung. Zeit. f. Tierpsychol. 21: 129–204.Google Scholar
  39. Payne, R. B. (1973): Behavior, mimetic songs and song dialects, and relationships of the Parasitic Indigobirds (VIDUA) of Africa. Ornithol. Monogr. 11: 1–333.Google Scholar
  40. Pohl-Apel, G. & Sossinka, R. (1984): Hormonal determination of song capacity in females of the Zebra Finch: critical phase of treatment. Z. Tierpsychol. 64: 330–336.Google Scholar
  41. Restall, R. (1996): Munias and Mannikins. Sussex.Google Scholar
  42. Schluter, D. (1988): The evolution of finch communities on islands and continents: Kenya vs. Galápagos. Ecological Monographs 58: 229–249.Google Scholar
  43. Selander, R.K., Smith, M.H., Yang, S.W., Johnson, W.E. & Gentry, J.B. (1971): Biochemical polymorphism and systematics in the genusPeromyscus. 1. Variation in the old-field mouse (Peromyscus polionotus). Studies in Genetics VI. Univ. Texas Publ. 7103:49–90.Google Scholar
  44. Sibley, C.G. & Monroe, B.L. (1990): Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World. New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  45. Smith, T.B. (1990): Resource use by bill morphs of an African finch: evidence for intraspecific competition. Ecology 71: 1246–1257.Google Scholar
  46. Steiner, H. (1960): Klassifikation der Prachtfinken, Spermestidae, auf Grund der Rachenzeichnungen ihrer Nestlinge. J. Ornithol. 101: 421–447.Google Scholar
  47. Swofford, D.L. (1993): PAUP: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, Version 3.1 Computer program distributed by the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
  48. Wenzel, J. W. (1992): Behavioral homology and phylogeny. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 361–381.Google Scholar
  49. ten Cate, C.J. (1986): Listening behaviour and song learning in Zebra Finches. Anim. Behav. 34: 1267–1269.Google Scholar
  50. Witherbee, D.K. (1957): Natal plumages and downy pteryloses of passerine birds of North America. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 113: 343–436.Google Scholar
  51. Wolters, H.E. (1987): Zur Stammesgeschichte der afrikanischen Prachtfinken. Trochilus 8: 37–76.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Ornithologen-Gesellschaft/Blackwell Wissenschafts-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis F. Baptista
    • 1
  • Robin Lawson
    • 2
  • Eleanor Visser
    • 2
  • Douglas A. Bell
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ornithology and MammalogyCalifornia Academy of SciencesSan Francisco
  2. 2.Osher Foundation Laboratory for Molecular SystematicsCalifornia Academy of SciencesSan Francisco

Personalised recommendations