Taxonomic structure and notes
Several recent studies place this family within Struthioniformes, with rheas as closest relatives#R#R#R#R. Sequence of genera modified in line with recent morphological and molecular analyses, which show Tinamus and Crypturellus to be sister groups, with Nothocercus basal to all other tinamous#R#R#R.
Recent phylogenetic study suggests that genus is sister to a clade containing Eulipoa and Megapodius#R; earlier genetic study instead found that it belongs to a clade containing mound-building Alectura, Aepypodius, Talegalla and Leipoa#R. Alternatively used genus name, Megacephalon, is a nomen nudum#R.
Recent genetic studies#R#R#R suggest that this genus should be lumped with Aburria, a treatment supported by some morphological data. On the other hand, some clear morphological and, especially, vocal differences exist between the two, and it seems more appropriate to retain them as separate genera, pending further investigation#R. In the past, all members of Pipile were even included in Penelope.
Some recent studies suggest that Pipile should perhaps be subsumed within this genus (see above).
Subfamily name formed as above in order to avoid homonymy with nomenclature used in Diptera; initial spelling, Ortalidainae, is erroneous and must be emended as above#R#R.
Genetic data support this genus as representing a monophyletic group#R. Members considered to form a superspecies#R.
Generic limits in the curassows are controversial. Some authors have subsumed Mitu, Pauxi and even Nothocrax within Crax. Others have given reasons for maintaining the four genera separate, and pointed out also that Nothocrax was a strong outlier in the group, a prediction subsequently verified by genetic data (revealing that Pauxi, Mitu and Nothocrax share the same clade and are sister to Crax#R); most authors since 1970s have followed this second course. Recent osteological data, however, provide evidence for subsuming Mitu into Pauxi#R, and another recent study produced morphological and genetic data to support this merger#R. Further investigation needed#R. The four members of genus Mitu are all closely related.
Generic limits in the curassows are controversial (see Mitu).
Contains two African species reckoned to have diverged from the New World quails c. 37.4 million years ago in the Oligocene, and from each other c. 9.6 million years ago#R. Given the considerable time since Ptilopachus diverged from remaining members of Odontophoridae (Philortyx, Oreortyx, Colinus, Callipepla, Dendrortyx, Odontophorus, Rhynchortyx, Dactylortyx and Cyrtonyx), as well as clear disjunction of Old World taxa from New World taxa, this new subfamily recently erected to encompass Ptilopachus#R.
Recent genetic investigations indicate that this genus, previously included with the Old World members of Phasianidae, is close to the New World Odontophoridae#R#R#R.
This genus incorporates Lophortyx Bonaparte, 1838.
Includes, in Tetraonini, all taxa that have commonly been separated in families Meleagrididae and Tetraonidae.
Recent study found weak relationship between this genus and Polyplectron#R.
Genus considered incertae sedis#R. Included here tentatively, as a possible link between Rollulinae and Phasianinae, pending the required genetic study.
Recent molecular research suggests that Afropavo forms a weakly supported clade with Pavo, Argusianus, Rheinardia and Polyplectron#R.
Recent molecular research suggests that Pavo forms a weakly supported clade with Afropavo, Argusianus, Rheinardia and Polyplectron#R.
Recent molecular research suggests that Argusianus forms a weakly supported clade with Afropavo, Pavo, Rheinardia and Polyplectron#R. Citation of genus name replaces previous version “Argusianus Rafinesque, 1815”, which is a nomen nudum, as it was not associated with any particular taxon#R.
Recent molecular research suggests that Rheinardia forms a weakly supported clade with Afropavo, Pavo, Argusianus and Polyplectron#R. Genus name has frequently been misspelt Rheinartia, and in the past even as Rheinhardius, Rheinardius, Rheinartius or Rheinhardtius, among others#R.
Recent molecular research suggests that Polyplectron forms a weakly supported clade with Afropavo, Pavo, Argusianus and Rheinardia#R.
Broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Asian Phasianidae found that genera Coturnix, Gallus and Bambusicola form a subclade within a clade of pheasants, to the exclusion of the two partridge genera Alectoris and Perdix#R, although other studies have not supported this finding.
Broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Asian Phasianidae found that genera Alectoris and Perdix form a monophyletic grouping to the exclusion of all pheasants and such genera as Bambusicola and Coturnix#R. In a phylogenetic study of Alectoris#R, analyses of mtDNA sequences supported the existence of three main evolutionary events and accorded with relationships reconstructed on the basis of allozyme data. The first event separated N African A. barbara and Arabian A. melanocephala from the other Alectoris; following this, W taxa A. graeca and A. rufa separated from E species; recent speciation events gave rise to A. chukar, A. magna, and A. philbyi.
Formerly treated as a subgenus within a broad genus Francolinus, but latter as then constituted was found to be polyphyletic#R#R. Francolinus has therefore been restricted to the five Asiatic species; the African species are now generally divided among Pternistis, Peliperdix and Scleroptila (see below)#R.
Formerly treated as a much broader genus, including Pternistis and others, but when thus constituted was found to be polyphyletic#R#R. It has therefore been restricted to the five related Asiatic species; the African species are now mainly divided among Pternistis (see above), Peliperdix and Scleroptila (see below)#R.
Formerly treated as a subgenus within a greatly expanded Francolinus, but latter genus, when thus constituted, was found to be polyphyletic#R#R.
Formerly treated as a subgenus within a greatly expanded Francolinus, but latter genus, when thus constituted, was found to be polyphyletic#R#R. Francolinus has therefore been restricted to the five Asiatic species; the African species are now generally divided among Pternistis (see above), Peliperdix and Scleroptila (below)#R.
Formerly treated as a subgenus within a greatly expanded Francolinus, but latter genus, when thus constituted, was found to be polyphyletic#R#R. Francolinus has therefore been restricted to the five Asiatic species; the African species are now generally divided among Pternistis and Peliperdix (see above) and Scleroptila#R.
Broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Asian Phasianidae found that genera Coturnix, Gallus and Bambusicola form a subclade within a clade of pheasants, to the exclusion of two partridge genera (Alectoris, Perdix)#R.
Broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Asian Phasianidae found that genera Coturnix, Gallus and Bambusicola form a subclade within a clade of pheasants, to the exclusion of two partridge genera (Alectoris, Perdix)#R, although other studies have not supported this finding.
Broad molecular study of Phasianidae found that genera Tetraophasis, Lophophorus, Tragopan and Ithaginis form one of two major subclades, within which present genus is most closely related to Lophophorus#R. Recent molecular study found a sister relationship between Lophophorus and Tetraophasis#R, hence placement of Tetraophasis in tribe Lophophorini.
Broad molecular study of Phasianidae found that genera Tetraophasis, Lophophorus, Tragopan and Ithaginis form one of two major subclades, within which present genus is most closely related to Tetraophasis#R. Recent molecular study found a sister relationship between Lophophorus and Tetraophasis#R.
Broad molecular study of Phasianidae found that genera Tetraophasis, Lophophorus, Tragopan and Ithaginis form one of two major subclades, within which present genus is most closely related to Ithaginis#R.
Genus sometimes considered incertae sedis. Broad molecular study of Phasianidae, however, found that genera Tetraophasis, Lophophorus, Tragopan and Ithaginis form one of two major subclades, within which present genus is most closely related to Tragopan#R.
Genus previously considered incertae sedis. Broad molecular study of Phasianidae, however, found that Pucrasia forms a well-supported subclade which also comprises Syrmaticus, Chrysolophus, Phasianus and Lophura#R.
Recent broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Phasianidae found no evidence that Syrmaticus is polyphyletic; instead, the genus is part of a well-supported subclade that also contains Pucrasia, Chrysolophus, Phasianus and Lophura#R.
In recent broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Phasianidae, this genus found to be part of a well-supported subclade that also contains Pucrasia, Syrmaticus, Phasianus and Lophura#R.
In recent broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Phasianidae, this genus found to be part of a well-supported subclade that also contains Pucrasia, Syrmaticus, Chrysolophus and Lophura#R.
Broad molecular study of Phasianidae found that Crossoptilon forms, together with Lophura, one branch of a subclade that also comprises Pucrasia, Syrmaticus, Chrysolophus and Phasianus#R.
In a genetic study (cytochrome b) of relationships of Syrmaticus to Phasianus, Catreus and Lophura, it was found that Phasianus versicolor, Catreus wallichii and Lophura erythrophthalma formed a cluster. Catreus was considered more closely related to Phasianus than to Syrmaticus#R.
Broad molecular study of Phasianidae found that Lophura forms, together with Crossoptilon, one branch of a subclade that also comprises Pucrasia, Syrmaticus, Chrysolophus and Phasianus#R.
Includes all taxa that have commonly been separated in families Meleagrididae and Tetraonidae.
Position of genus uncertain. Recent genetic studies give contradicting results. One broad molecular (mtDNA) study of Asian Phasianidae found that the genera Alectoris and Perdix form a monophyletic grouping to the exclusion of all pheasants and such genera as Bambusicola and Coturnix#R. Another analysis found Perdix to be related either to typical pheasants (Phasianini) or to Ithaginis#R. Yet another study, however, places Perdix as sister to Meleagris in Tetraonini#R.
Position of genus uncertain; in past, often awarded its own family, Meleagrididae. Recent phylogenetic study places Meleagris as sister to Perdix in Tetraonini#R.
Genetic analyses show that Bonasa is monophyletic and is basal to all grouse of the traditionally recognized family Tetraonidae (below, species 168–187)#R#R.
Often included in Dendragapus, but a molecular analysis validates generic separation of Falcipennis#R.
This genus is sometimes subsumed within Tetrao, and the two appear to be very close, to the extent that they are sister-taxa#R#R; however, given the striking homogeneity of each species-pair, generic separation seems appropriate#R.
One genetic study found that this genus forms a single well-differentiated clade#R, but subsequent molecular work suggested that it is closely related to Dendragapus obscurus#R and, more recently, that it comprises together with Dendragapus and Centrocercus an exclusively North American clade#R.
Results of genetic studies undertaken on Anseranas support the placement of the species within the order Anseriformes, but outside the family Anatidae#R#R#R.
Genus resurrected on basis chiefly of phylogenetic and ecological study which showed Nomonyx to be sister to Oxyura#R.
Systematic position of this genus uncertain. Some studies suggest that it is not close to Oxyura, but represents an independent lineage of its own#R. It is retained here in its traditional position, pending further information.
Systematic position uncertain. Has been placed between genera Coscoroba and Cygnus, but these two now appear to be sisters. Pending further information, Stictonetta here retained in its more or less traditional position.
Phylogenetic analyses indicate the branching of this genus prior to the divergence of geese and swans, and suggest a possible sister-group relationship between Coscoroba and Cygnus#R.
Sometimes isolated in its own tribe (Sarkidiornini).
Sometimes considered incertae sedis; one recent phylogenetic study found it to be sister to Cairina#R.
Genus Hymenolaimus has been considered variously an aberrant Anas and an ancient taxon in tribe Anatini, and has been placed in a highly derived clade Merganettini (then including the shelducks). A recent phylogenetic study, however, found that Hymenolaimus forms a monophyletic clade, not fitting within any of the other duck tribes#R.
In recent phylogenetic analysis, this genus found to be close to Netta and Aythya#R.
Considered incertae sedis by many. Traditionally placed here in Anatini, but further research needed.
Recent study found this genus to form a monophyletic clade, distinct from Lophonetta, Speculanas and Amazonetta#R.
Separation from genus Anas appears to be warranted#R. In recent phylogenetic study, this genus found to be monophyletic but relationships unclear#R.
Separation from genus Anas appears to be warranted#R. In recent phylogenetic study, this genus and Amazonetta were supported as sister-groups in all analyses#R.
Separation from genus Anas appears to be warranted#R#R. In recent phylogenetic study, this genus and Speculanas were supported as sister-groups in all analyses#R.
Recognition of this genus supported by genetic findings#R.
Separation of this genus from Anas supported by genetic study#R.
A mtDNA study corroborated the monophyly of Mareca, but placed this clade among other dabbling ducks, thereby possibly making Anas paraphyletic#R. More recently, separation of this genus from Anas supported by another genetic study#R.
In past, genus listed as Mesoenas Reichenbach, 1861, a name introduced to replace the preoccupied Mesites I. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1861. Present name is older and now well established in literature, but was not correctly introduced and so requires application to ICZN for formal conservation; Mesitornis meantime retained herein, as in most other works, in order to favour stability#R.
Phylogenetic study of species genera Columba and Streptopelia led to extensive reorganization; all New World species traditionally included within present genus were transferred to a separate genus, Patagioenas#R, a split supported by previously described differences in morphology, serology and behaviour#R.
Often merged into Columba but rather distinctive, with strong terrestrial habits.
Phylogenetic study of genera Columba and Streptopelia led to extensive reorganization#R; some species traditionally included within present genus are here transferred to reinstated genera Spilopelia and Nesoenas.
Genus recently split from Streptopelia on basis of genetic differences#R combined with long-recognized distinctiveness amidst Streptopelia species; sometimes listed as Stigmatopelia#R but Spilopelia, from same publication, was selected by First Revisers#R.
Genus as currently constituted sometimes merged “back” into Streptopelia, where may be treated as a subgenus#R; the two species form a distinctive, reasonably well-defined group, with shared similarities in plumage, morphology (e.g. bifurcated neck feathers) and voice#R, and they are genetically related#R, so separate generic treatment appears appropriate#R. Genus is masculine#R.
Genus generally regarded as being closely related to Macropygia, and indeed sometimes included within it; however, this has been questioned, and similarities in coloration noted with some members of Columba, e.g. C. vitiensis.
Genus probably closest to Macropygia, which it resembles in shape and colour pattern of outer rectrices.
Recently split from Columba on basis of genetic differences#R, supporting previously described differences in morphology, serology and behaviour#R.
Internal arrangement reorganized on basis of phylogenetic study#R.
Affinities not well known, and in the past placed in its own subfamily due to details of skeleton and tarsal scutellation#R; traditionally considered close to, and herein provisionally placed alongside, Geotrygon, pending genetic studies.
In past, present genus was restricted to G. versicolor, the type species, with Osculatia applied to purpurata/saphirina, and all other species of group (herein Leptotrygon, Zentrygon) placed in Oreopeleia#R#R. Subsequently all were normally lumped into Geotrygon#R#R, but recent genetic work has demonstrated that this arrangement is polyphyletic, recommending the arrangement adopted herein#R.
Previously included within Geotrygon, but genetic evidence backs up long-held belief that this taxon is highly distinct; genetically closest to Leptotila, though similar in aspect and habits to Geotrygon#R.
Hitherto included within Geotrygon, and previously in Oreopeleia, but genetic evidence indicates that this group of ground-doves is most closely related to Zenaida, despite marked differences in morphology and behaviour; present genus morphologically inseparable from Geotrygon#R.
Distinctive genus perhaps belonging to the large radiation of bronzewings, where may be most closely allied to Chalcophaps; however, genetic study suggests sister relationship to group consisting of Alopecoenas, Gallicolumba, Geopelia and others#R.
Formerly considered to include Alopecoenas, but molecular data reveal that arrangement to be polyphyletic#R.
Formerly included within Gallicolumba, but molecular data reveal that arrangement to be polyphyletic; present genus close to Leucosarcia, and also to Geophaps, Phaps, Ocyphaps and Geopelia#R.
Monotypic genus of uncertain affinities; considered by some to be derived from bronzewings (Phaps and allied genera), but other authors have suggested a relationship with Gallicolumba, or with the monotypic Trugon of New Guinea. A new phylogenetic hypothesis, however, indicates that Leucosarcia is part of an Australasian radiation (rather than sister to Alopecoenas) and distant from Gallicolumba#R.
Belongs to the large radiation of Australian bronzewings, which also includes the genera Geophaps, Phaps and Ocyphaps, and, more distantly, Henicophaps and Chalcophaps.
Belongs to the large radiation of Australian bronzewings, which also includes Petrophassa, Phaps and Ocyphaps, and, more distantly, Henicophaps and Chalcophaps; sometimes subsumed within Petrophassa.
Belongs to the large radiation of Australian bronzewings, which also includes Petrophassa, Geophaps and Ocyphaps, and, more distantly, Henicophaps and Chalcophaps.
Monospecific genus belonging to the large radiation of Australian bronzewings, which also includes Petrophassa, Geophaps and Phaps, and, more distantly, Henicophaps and Chalcophaps.
Despite superficial resemblances to Streptopelia, probably most closely related to bronzewing group (Phaps and allies) on basis of behaviour.
Unique among pigeons in having no gallbladder; also lacks oil-gland, has reticulate scaling on the strong, thick legs, and has 16 rectrices; no obvious close relatives.
Distinctive genus of uncertain affinities. Probably close to Goura#R; perhaps closest to Gallicolumba, with which it may share a common ancestral stock. Larger extinct form C. canacorum, known from New Caledonia and Tonga, extinct c. 2500 years ago.
Very distinctive genus of uncertain affinities, perhaps most closely allied to Gallicolumba. Some early workers placed it in its own family, Didunculidae, but recent molecular analyses indicate that it is basal to a clade containing Goura, Caloenas, Raphus and Pezophaps#R. Single species survives, although a larger, extinct member of the genus has been found in cave deposits on ‘Eua (S Tonga).
Shows affinities with both Australian bronzewings (Phaps and allies) and African spot-winged doves (Turtur).
Apparently has no close relatives; restricted to Philippines.
Until recently subsumed within Ptilinopus (which see); present genus is basal to all fruit-doves, and is characterized by bright yellow underwing-coverts#R.
Until recently subsumed within Ptilinopus (which see)#R; restricted to Philippines and Sulawesi, apart from one aberrant form from SE Asia, and characterized by relatively large size, and emarginated first primaries.
Distinctive genus, shown by molecular data to be nested amidst traditional Ptilinopus (which see).
Distinctive monotypic genus characterized by notched primaries and short, very rounded wings. Perhaps most closely related to Chrysoena, but recent genetic study indicates sister relationship with Alectroenas#R.
Distinctive genus, comprising three small species, which are thought to represent an early colonization of Fiji by Ptilinopus stock; genus often merged into Ptilinopus (which see).
Recent molecular work#R indicates that morphologically distinctive genera Alectroenas and Drepanoptila nest within traditional, expanded version of present genus; the different lineages are accommodated here by the additional recognition of genera Megaloprepia, Ramphiculus and Chrysoena; further work required in order to confirm that present genus as defined here, in reduced form, is now monophyletic.
Distinctive genus of uncertain affinities, perhaps allied to Lopholaimus, which also has only 12 tail feathers, and cere feathered dorsally; more distantly allied to Ducula.
Affinities uncertain; apparently close to Gymnophaps and possibly also to Ducula; alternatively, may be related to the cuckoo-dove assemblage (Macropygia/Turacoena/Reinwardtoena).
Relationships uncertain; somewhat similar to some Ducula in coloration and colour patterns; recent molecular study suggests probable sister relationship with Lopholaimus#R.
Distinctive monotypic genus of uncertain affinities. Perhaps most closely related to Hemiphaga, as both of these genera have only 12 tail feathers, while cere is feathered dorsally; recent molecular study suggests probable sister relationship with Gymnophaps#R.
Recent genetic investigation#R suggested that this genus should also incorporate all species currently in Pterocles (see below), although that would mask relationships among the members of the family; alternatively, species could be grouped in three genera according to that study’s well-supported clades; or, more conservatively, a third treatment, involving two clades, may be more appropriate. Further study clearly required.
In recent genetic investigation#R, this genus as presently constituted was not recovered as monophyletic in any of the analyses, as it was rendered paraphyletic by Syrrhaptes. The placing of all species in Syrrhaptes (which pre-dates Pterocles), suggested as a possibility, would, however, mask relationships among the members of the family; alternatively, species could be grouped in three genera according to the well-supported clades found in the study; or, more conservatively, a third treatment, involving two clades, may be more appropriate. Further study clearly required.
Suggested to constitute two separate families, one Asian, the other Australasian, on basis of DNA-DNA hybridization results#R; some backing for this may be offered by the different nest structures of the two groups, but to date similarities generally considered to outweigh differences, and the proposal has received little support.
In mtDNA study of this genus, sequence divergence among species was greater (11.1–16.2%) than is typical for congeneric birds, and there was little constant evidence for strong relationships among any of the species except N. griseus, N. maculosus and N. leucopterus#R. In a more recent study, interspecific variation in cranial morphology found to be so extensive that inclusion of all species in a single genus could be misleading#R.
Proposal that this genus be subsumed within Caprimulgus#R has received very little support; indeed now separated in different subfamilies.
Previously subsumed within Eurostopodus, but recently resurrected#R, a decision supported by a separate phylogenetic study#R. The two species included here appear not to be closely related to Eurostopodus.
A new genus created to accommodate G. enarratus, formerly placed in Caprimulgus. Phylogenetic analysis indicated this species’ wide genetic divergence in both nuclear DNA and mtDNA from all other genera and all other caprimulgid species studied: enarratus found to be sister to, and basal to, all caprimulgids apart from Eurostopodus#R. Plumage pattern distinct from that of all other nightjars, including pronounced facial discs, and unique narrow collar on side and rear of neck, and detailed investigation desirable; feeding behaviour apparently unusual, hunting perhaps confined to interior of forest#R; white eggs laid on low shrub (rather than on ground); voice and vocal behaviour almost unknown, but thought probably to be unusual.
Previously subsumed within Caprimulgus, but recent studies indicate that separate treatment is more appropriate#R#R. Some recent authors have subsumed Nyctipolus within Antrostomus#R.
Previously subsumed within Caprimulgus, but recent studies indicate that separate treatment is merited#R. Some recent authors have subsumed Systellura within Antrostomus#R.
Earlier genetic studies suggested that this genus was embedded in Caprimulgus#R, but more recent analyses found it to be basal to a group that included Uropsalis, Hydropsalis and some other New World groups#R. Present genus has been subsumed within Antrostomus by some authors#R.
Subsumed within Macropsalis by some authors#R#R, who maintain that distinguishing characters (primarily tail shape) are not appropriate for generic distinction.
Previously subsumed within Caprimulgus, and more recently#R within Antrostomus. Phylogenetic study, however, indicates that it merits separate treatment#R.
Previously subsumed within Caprimulgus, but recent phylogenetic study indicates that it merits separate treatment#R.
In the past sometimes subsumed within Chaetura or, occasionally, Rhaphidura.
Genus formerly merged with Chaetura or Mearnsia.
Formerly subsumed within Chaetura, but is morphologically and structurally distinct#R.
Perhaps closest to Aerodramus, and these two commonly merged into Collocalia.
Previously subsumed within Apus; affinities uncertain.
Has commonly been subsumed within Apus, but nowadays is increasingly separated; differs in feather lice, foot structure of nestling, large size, and tendency towards white underparts. Recent molecular phylogeny based on a taxon-complete sampling at species level of Tachymarptis and Apus revealed that the two genera were reciprocally monophyletic in all reconstructions#R.
Recent molecular phylogeny based on a taxon-complete sampling at species level of Tachymarptis and Apus revealed that the two genera were reciprocally monophyletic in all reconstructions#R.
Perhaps related to Eulampis and Anthracothorax through nest and display; in past placed close to Oreotrochilus.
It has been suggested that this genus should be subsumed within Glaucis#R.
Genus formerly placed in subfamily Phaethornithinae owing largely to confusion regarding its nest, but behavioural and molecular studies suggest that it is not related to that subfamily; on basis of external morphology, hindneck musculature and behaviour it has even been placed, together with genus Androdon, in a separate subfamily, Doryferinae. Recent molecular analysis, however, indicates that both Doryfera and Androdon are part of the mango assemblage#R. In many older works generic name Hemistephania was used.
Affinities of genus unknown; song and nest pattern indicate relationship with Colibri.
Genus formerly placed in subfamily Phaethornithinae, but behavioural and molecular studies suggest that the species is not related to that subfamily; on basis of external morphology, hindneck musculature and behaviour it has even been placed, together with genus Doryfera, in a separate subfamily, Doryferinae. Recent molecular analysis, however, indicates that both present genus and Doryfera are part of the mango assemblage#R.
Previously thought to be close to genera Leucochloris and Leucippus, having morphological and behavioural affinities with those. Recent molecular analysis, however, indicates that present genus is part of the large mango assemblage#R.
Genus previously thought to be very closely related to, or even congeneric with, Orthorhyncus, but recent molecular analysis indicates that the two are genetically well separated#R.
Previously subsumed within Anthracothorax, mainly on grounds of some details of morphology, together with behaviour and nest structure. Remarkable form of bill, however, unique within the family. On the other hand, recent phylogenetic study based on plumage colour spectra supports retention in Anthracothorax#R.
Recent phylogenetic study based on plumage colour spectra suggests this genus is closest to Eulampis#R.
Recent phylogenetic study based on plumage colour spectra suggests that this genus is closest to Anthracothorax#R. Has been considered closely related to continental Anthracothorax and Topaza.
Recent molecular analysis found that most genera in the following linear sequence, from Heliangelus to Metallura, are members of a monophyletic group#R; authors of that study also proposed that Polyonymus, Sappho and Taphrolesbia (not sampled in their analysis) be included in same group.
Genus has been thought to be closely related to a high-Andean lineage that includes Oreotrochilus, Lesbia, Oreonympha and Metallura. Present generic name based on misspelling of species name.
Closely related to Lophornis. Includes genus Popelairia (formerly used for D. conversii, D. popelairii, D. langsdorffi and D. letitiae).
Occasionally subsumed within Adelomyia; more information needed in order to assess most appropriate generic placement of these two species.
Systematic position poorly understood. Genera Phlogophilus, Urosticte and Anthocephala have been suggested as close relatives, some authors even considering all four to be congeneric; because monophyly of these four is doubtful, however, monospecific Adelomyia is maintained.
In past, these species listed in genus Cyanolesbia, but the name is unidentifiable.
Genus sometimes merged into Lesbia; may be closely related to L. victoriae.
Systematic position uncertain; has been thought probably closest to Sappho and Polyonymus. Genetic data suggest that Taphrolesbia may be sister to Aglaiocercus#R.
Genus sometimes merged into Lesbia; affinities uncertain, but may be closely related to Taphrolesbia. Genetic data suggest that Polyonymus may be sister to Oreotrochilus#R.
As presently constituted, genus is almost certainly polyphyletic#R#R. Chalcostigma and Metallura may be sister-genera#R#R. It has been proposed that Chalcostigma consists of two species-groups: (i) C. olivaceum + C. stanleyi, and (ii) C. ruficeps + (C. herrani + C. heteropogon)#R.
Genus thought to be closely related to Chalcostigma, Oreonympha and Metallura. Recent genetic study found that this genus and Oreonympha, although closely related, were nested within Chalcostigma#R.
A distinctive genus which may, on basis mainly of plumage coloration, be closest to Oxypogon. Recent genetic study found that this genus and Oxypogon, although closely related, were nested within Chalcostigma#R.
Genetic studies suggest that this genus and Chalcostigma may be sisters#R#R#R.
Recent molecular study found that most of the genera in the following sequence, from Haplophaedia to Heliodoxa, formed a monophyletic group#R. Present family-group name selected over Docimastini by First Revisers#R.
Sometimes merged into Eriocnemis; has also been considered to be close to Ocreatus and Urosticte.
Genus generally considered sister-taxon to Haplophaedia.
Preliminary genetic data suggest that this genus is close to, or even embedded within, Eriocnemis#R. In past, thought perhaps to be closely related to Heliactin and Heliothryx.
Recent molecular studies found this genus to represent a monophyletic group, with Heliodoxa as sister#R.
Has been thought possibly close to Oreotrochilus on basis of behaviour and external morphology.
Has been considered closely related to Coeligena, or even lumped with it#R, but this relationship is not supported by some studies#R.
Has been thought to be closely related to Coeligena, or even lumped with it#R#R, but this not supported by some studies#R.
On basis of display patterns, may be closely related to Haplophaedia, Eriocnemis and Urosticte.
Formerly considered a close relative of Oreotrochilus; behaviour and morphology suggest phylogenetic affinities with Boissonneaua.
On basis of behaviour, genus would belong to a clade including Haplophaedia, Eriocnemis and Ocreatus. Sometimes merged into Adelomyia.
Relationships uncertain. One study found this genus was not close to any other trochilid group#R. Previously thought perhaps to be closely related to Coeligena, even to the point that the two might be merged.
Recent molecular study suggested that this genus was almost certainly embedded within Chlorostilbon#R.
Recent molecular study suggested that this genus was almost certainly embedded within Chlorostilbon#R. Nest type indicates affinities with Chlorostilbon and Cynanthus; voice suggests affinities with Thalurania.
Sometimes merged into Abeillia; thought to be closely related to Stephanoxis.
Previously thought to be very closely related to Chrysolampis, or even synonymous, but recent molecular analysis indicates that the two are genetically well separated#R.
Previously subsumed within Campylopterus, partly on grounds of external morphology and flattened and thickened shafts of outer primaries, but this treatment not supported by recent molecular study#R.
Systematic relationships uncertain; perhaps closely related to Microchera, but sometimes considered close to Adelomyia, and possibly even synonymous.
In one study, this genus was found to be monophyletic and the sister to Anthracothorax and Eulampis#R.
Previously subsumed within genus Campylopterus, largely on basis of song structure and enlarged shaft of primary of male, but such treatment has gained little support.
Genus as currently constituted found not to be monophyletic#R. Further research required.
As currently constituted, this genus is not monophyletic#R; more thorough sampling of taxa required before a clearer picture can be presented. In HBW, species currently placed herein were spread out over six genera, with additional recognition of Agyrtria, Polyerata and Saucerottia, and relocation of some species in Leucippus and Hylocharis.
Genus previously thought to be closely related to Chlorostilbon. Recent study suggests much closer to Amazilia#R.
Monotypic genus, sometimes merged into Hylocharis because of similarity in plumage, but lacks swollen base of bill and enlarged nasal operculum of that genus. Recent study suggests that it is much closer to Amazilia#R.
Considered a close relative of Goldmania and perhaps of Hylocharis, sharing with former the long, stiffened central undertail-coverts; behaviour and external morphology show similarities to Eupherusa.
Genus linked with Goethalsia, with which it shares the long, stiffened central undertail-coverts; one proposal, based on external morphology, suggests placing of present species in Hylocharis; general behaviour, however, indicates possible affinities with Chlorostilbon. Study required.
This genus name replaces previously used Damophila, found to be preoccupied in Lepidoptera. Proposed replacement name Neodamophila#R not required, as Juliamyia already available. Affinities unclear; genus possibly close to Thalurania or Chlorostilbon.
Genus often merged into Hylocharis, though external morphology suggests closer relationship to Lampornis.
Genus sometimes merged into Eugenes or Heliodoxa.
Some authors merge Rhodopis into this genus.
Molecular studies#R#R indicate that genera Myrtis, Eulidia, Rhodopis, Thaumastura and Chaetocercus form a monophyletic group that includes also Calypte, Archilochus and Selasphorus.
Sometimes merged into an expanded version of Calliphlox; on basis of morphological characters, may be better placed within Chaetocercus.
Occasionally treated as a monospecific genus; at other extreme, considered to include all species of currently recognized genera Microstilbon, Doricha, Tilmatura, Calothorax and, sometimes, also Thaumastura, on grounds that females are very similar, males differing essentially in specialized details of plumage.
Genus sometimes merged into Calothorax, or incorporated in an expanded Calliphlox.
Genus sometimes merged into an expanded version of Calliphlox. Closely related to genus Doricha, which sometimes united with present genus on basis of similarity in morphological characters.
Sometimes expanded to include all species currently placed in Calypte, Archilochus and Stellula (the last now subsumed within Selasphorus).
Often merged into Archilochus, and both have sometimes been subsumed within Selasphorus; in morphology, vocalizations and displays, however, members of present genus stand apart from the Selasphorus–Archilochus assemblage. Alternatively, present genus sometimes merged into Mellisuga.
Sometimes merged into Mellisuga; alternatively linked with Selasphorus.
Probably closely related to Selasphorus, and sometimes subsumed within it.
Monotypic family of uncertain affinities. Some morphological similarities with Galliformes, especially Cracidae. Recent work suggests relationship with Cuculiformes, near Crotophaginae; shares with some cuckoos (Cuculidae) and some turacos (Musophagidae) an ancestral adaptation of bill apparatus linked with food-processing#R, although anisodactyl toe structure quite different from zygodactyl arrangement of all cuckoos. Genetic studies suggested possible relationship with either cuckoos or turacos (latter supported by osteological, behavioural and fossil evidence)#R; another study, using both mitochondrial and nuclear genes, found Columbiformes as closest relative (weakly supported), to the exclusion of both Cuculidae and Musophagidae#R.
Incorporates West Indian genera Saurothera and Hyetornis, which were found in a recent molecular analysis to be embedded within Coccyzus#R.
Commonly lumped into Chrysococcyx, but mtDNA divides bronze-cuckoos into two well-defined clades#R, and these may appropriately be treated as separate genera#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Cacomantis or Cuculus.
Sometimes subsumed within Cacomantis.
Often subsumed within Cuculus but shows notable morphological differences (e.g. in wing shape and tail-barring), and genetic data support this grouping#R.
Division into two subfamilies has been proposed#R: Heliopais and Podica in Podicinae; and Heliornis in Heliornithinae.
Sometimes awarded a family of its own, Sarothruridae#R. In past, was subsumed within Coturnicops by some authors.
Sometimes subsumed within Canirallus, but differs in having imperforate (rather than perforate) nostrils.
Sometimes subsumed within Rallina, but differs in marked sexual dimorphism.
Name Anurolimnas previously used for this genus, but Rufirallus has precedence#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Rallus, but differs in bill shape and plumage.
Recent molecular phylogeny of Pacific rails advocated that almost all of the species should be lumped under a broadly defined genus Gallirallus#R.
Genus sometimes enlarged to include Aramides, Amaurolimnas and Gymnocrex.
Incorporates genera Habropteryx, Nesoclopeus and Tricholimnas; many forms previously placed in Gallirallus.
Bourne et al.
, 2013Distinctiveness of genus from Neocrex merits elucidation.
Sometimes subsumed within Porzana, but molecular analysis suggests it is probably sister to Aramides#R.
Sometimes merged, with Aramides, in Eulabeornis; shows some similarities to Aramides, and may be derived from same stock.
Poliolimnas and Aenigmatolimnas are now subsumed within this genus. Differences in vocalizations among populations for which such data are available suggest that species diversity of bush-hens has probably been underestimated; further study required.
Usually included within Gallinula, but differs in structure of bill, skull and tarsus, and in plumage pattern.
Often subsumed within Gallinula, from which it differs in several morphological features.
Shows morphological affinities with Gruidae and Rallidae. DNA studies suggested possible grouping with finfoots in family Heliornithidae, but more recent molecular analyses indicate that it is probably sister-family to Gruidae#R.
Often included in Grus; ethological and DNA data imply closer to Anthropoides, but both sometimes merged into Grus; recent osteological and molecular studies support recognition of present genus#R#R.
Often merged with Grus, but recent osteological and molecular studies support its recognition#R#R.
In the past, frequently merged into Otis, and considered to be closely related to O. tarda mainly on grounds of similar bill shape and extensive sympatry; nowadays almost universally recognized as monotypic genus, and molecular phylogeny places it closer to Houbaropsis, Sypheotides and Lophotis#R. Recent detailed phylogenetic and biogeographical study, however, indicates that Tetrax is close to Otis and Chlamydotis#R.
Has frequently been considered to include Tetrax, and sometimes also Neotis and Ardeotis, but in structure, display and plumage highly distinctive and clearly meriting generic isolation from these forms.
Reported as apparently close to Neotis in HBW, but molecular evidence suggests it is closest to Otis#R.
Sometimes merged into Otis; more recently, molecular evidence suggests that it belongs with Ardeotis#R#R, but situation still not fully resolved and for the present Neotis retained.
In past, frequently listed as Choriotis, but Ardeotis has priority. Sometimes merged with Otis (which see). One recent phylogeny based on mtDNA found that Ardeotis arabs and A. kori formed a clade with Heterotetrax rueppelii#R.
Sometimes merged into Eupodotis, but differs notably from all other bustards except Sypheotides in showing reversed sexual size dimorphism.
Occasionally merged with Eupodotis, but differs notably from all other bustards except Houbaropsis in showing reversed sexual size dimorphism.
Frequently merged into Eupodotis. One study suggested that the two are sister taxa#R.
Relationships uncertain; further research required. One study suggested that this genus is sister to Afrotis#R.
Previously included in Corythaixoides, but appears sufficiently distinctive to warrant monotypic genus#R.
Recent cytochrome b work suggests this genus comprises specialized forms of typical turaco and should be merged into Tauraco#R; further study needed, as systematics of the entire group remain rather confused.
In the past, older genus name Colymbus was used for these species, but it has been suppressed#R.
Molecular evidence revealed that traditional grouping of all storm-petrels in a single family was paraphyletic#R#R; precise relationships at higher levels within this order are still disputed, but storm-petrels now generally split into two families, comprising “southern” Oceanitidae and “northern” Hydrobatidae#R.
Molecular evidence revealed that traditional grouping of all storm-petrels in a single family was paraphyletic#R#R; precise relationships at higher levels within this order are still disputed, but storm-petrels now generally split into two families, comprising “southern” Oceanitidae and “northern” Hydrobatidae#R.
Incorporates Oceanodroma, within which Hydrobates was found in recent studies to be embedded#R#R; since Hydrobates is the older name, it is used for this expanded genus.
Several recent reviews of this family have been produced. The following list owes much to an extensive phylogenetic analysis of 24 taxa based on full mtDNA (cytochrome b) sequences#R.
Within the group of large albatrosses in this genus, significant confusion exists about the taxonomic rank of breeding populations on specific islands.
This genus previously merged with Diomedea.
Earlier proposal that this genus is closer to Pachyptila than to any other genus#R is supported by recent genetic data#R.
Name Lugensa formerly used for this monotypic genus, but type species of that name is considered indeterminable; some authors, however, disagree and continue to use Lugensa#R#R#R.
Sometimes divided into several subgenera#R. Includes several species described in genus Aestrelata, which was erroneously emended by some authors to Oestrelata.
Previously included in Puffinus, but represents a lineage distinct from both Puffinus and Calonectris#R#R#R#R.
Until recently included all species currently placed in Ardenna, but these have now been shown to represent a distinct lineage#R#R#R#R. Taxonomy of the P. assimilis/P. lherminieri complex has long been debated. Recent molecular analysis by one group of researchers#R and further refinements by another#R have resulted in a major rearrangement of taxa and the promotion of many of them to species rank. Owing to the sheer number of taxa in the complex, the inaccessibility of much museum material for comparative purposes, the subtlety of many phenotypical characters and the expectation that nocturnal vocalizations, many unknown, will play a significant part in species limits, this is a particular case where the scoring system used herein is currently impractical. With the exception of N Atlantic taxa (see below under P. lherminieri) we therefore accept the taxonomy set out in one recent (2007) treatment#R as the most coherent reorganization of the complex based on the available evidence.
Considered somewhat intermediate between Pterodroma and Bulweria. Previously merged into Pterodroma, but appears sufficiently distinctive #R.
Separation from Pterodroma has been questioned, but supported by recent studies#R#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Pseudibis, and probably closely related to it, but greater size, absence of contrasting colour markings, calling behaviour and ecological specialization on wetter substrates#R all indicate phylogenetic distinctiveness.
Incorporates genera Lampribis and Hagedashia.
Has been placed in a separate, monospecific family Cochleariidae. Traditionally linked with night-herons (especially Nycticorax), but DNA studies indicate possible relationship with Tigrisoma. Recent analysis of skeletal characters, however, suggested possibly closer relationship to Botaurus and Ixobrychus#R.
Phylogenetic study indicates that Zebrilus, despite resemblance to Tigrisoma in plumage and forest habitat, is closest to Botaurus#R.
Often merged into Gorsachius or Nycticorax.
Often merged into Nycticorax, but molecular study, as well as skeletal characters, indicates substantial divergence between the two#R.
Genus has been incorporated variously into Ardea, Ardeola and Egretta. DNA studies indicate closer genetic link with Ardea than with Egretta#R#R.
Relationships of this genus have long been uncertain; DNA studies indicate that it may be sister to Egretta#R.
Author of this genus has usually been given as Bonaparte, 1855, but the name Pilherodius was first used two years earlier, by Reichenbach#R.
Origins and relationships somewhat obscure. Some affinities with Ardeidae, Ciconiidae, Balaenicipitidae, Phoenicopteridae and Charadriidae suspected. A recent molecular study found this form to be sister to Balaeniceps#R.
Some morphological and behavioural affinities with Ardeidae, Scopidae and Pelecanidae; has previously been considered a member of Ciconiidae, and work on DNA suggested that it might belong within Pelecanidae. A recent molecular study found this form to be sister to Scopus#R.
Recent DNA work indicates that species in this genus fall into three well-supported clades: an Old World clade, a monospecific clade (Pelecanus onocrotalus, weakly grouped with the Old World clade), and a New World clade#R. These findings are reflected in the species sequence below.
Apparently sister to a clade formed by Morus and Sula#R.
Previously included in Sula, but recently found to represent a separate lineage#R.
Previously considered to include both Papasula and Morus, but recent study found that these taxa represent three monophyletic lineages#R.
Previously subsumed within Phalacrocorax, and some phylogenetic studies support lumping all species of this family into the single genus#R. Name Halietor is a junior objective synonym of Microcarbo.
Sequence of species below is based on findings of recent phylogenetic study#R.
Genus Chionis described by diagnosis, but no species included; thus, description of genus pre-dates those of both species.
Formerly included in Charadriidae, sometimes in its own subfamily, but analysis of morphological characters indicates closer relationship to Chionidae#R#R; this relationship is supported by genetic data#R, which also suggest placement of Pluvianellus in a monotypic family, a conclusion backed up by recent analysis of phenotypic characters#R. Recently treated as a subfamily within Chionidae#R.
Traditionally placed within Glareolidae; phylogenetic data confirm its distinctiveness, and indicate that it is distant from that family, being sister to the plover and oystercatcher/stilt/avocet clades#R.
Species limits in this genus are complex, with varying degrees of hybridization where ranges of taxa overlap.
Traditionally linked with Recurvirostridae and Haematopodidae, and has sometimes even been included within the former, typically in its own subfamily. Genetic data support these relationships, with latter as sister-group#R.
Recent extensive genetic study#R indicates that, contrary to some earlier suggestions, this genus belongs in Charadriidae, being sister to the other genera placed in this family.
Sometimes subsumed within Eudromias, but validity of this monospecific genus is supported by analysis of phenotypic characters#R. Recent genetic study indicates that Oreopholus is sister to a clade consisting of Vanellus and Charadrius#R.
Genetic data#R support placement of this genus in Charadriidae, rather than, as earlier suspected, in Scolopacidae.
Sometimes subsumed within Charadrius. Limits and validity of Thinornis perhaps still debatable.
Monotypic genus, often subsumed within Charadrius.
Often merged into Vanellus, although in several aspects, including plumage details and some physiological features, exhibits similarities to Charadrius. Recent analysis of phenotypic characters indicates that it is sister to Vanellus#R.
Often placed in Charadrius, and traditionally grouped with other Australasian aberrant Charadrius-like genera; however, recently grouped in Vanellinae on basis of allozymes, patterning of wing and presence of hind toe#R, and phylogenetic study supports its distinction from Charadrius#R.
Relationships uncertain, and somewhat controversial: formerly considered to belong to family Glareolidae, where listed closest to genus Rhinoptilus, and on occasion, also in past, placed in genus Eudromias; more recent biochemical studies suggested that genus might possibly be merged with Charadrius#R. Since then, correct placement still unclear: one study grouped it with Vanellinae#R and another with Charadriinae#R.
Has been considered very close to Charadrius, and perhaps even congeneric. However, recent study, based on multigene evidence, placed present genus along with Erythrogonys and Peltohyas as forming sister clade to Vanellus#R.
Traditionally placed in Gruiformes, in close association with Turnicidae, but genetic data#R#R#R#R indicate that it is sister to Thinocoridae, both belonging to the scolopacine radiation of the Charadriiformes.
Sometimes merged into Rostratula, but shows marked differences in morphology and behaviour.
Recent multigene phylogeny indicates that this genus and Hydrophasianus are closely related and form one of two groups within the family, the other containing all remaining currently recognized genera#R. Earlier proposals that Hydrophasianus be included in Jacana, or that Actophilornis, Metopidius and Irediparra be synonymized with Jacana, now out of favour.
Recent multigene phylogeny indicates that this genus and Jacana are closely related#R (see Genus Jacana).
Occasionally lumped with Irediparra and Microparra in Metopidius, or alternatively with Metopidius and Irediparra in Jacana, but neither proposal widely accepted (see Genus Jacana).
Occasionally considered to include Actophilornis, Irediparra and Microparra, or alternatively lumped with Actophilornis and Irediparra in Jacana, but neither proposal widely accepted (see Genus Jacana).
Occasionally lumped with Actophilornis and Microparra in Metopidius, or alternatively with Actophilornis and Metopidius in Jacana, but neither proposal widely accepted (see Genus Jacana).
Occasionally lumped with Actophilornis and Irediparra in Metopidius, but this proposal not widely accepted (see Genus Jacana).
Sequence of species in this family is based largely on findings of a recent phylogenetic study#R.
Recent phylogenetic study indicated that the hitherto recognized monotypic genera Aphriza, Philomachus, Limicola, Eurynorhynchus and Tryngites should all be merged into genus Calidris#R; this suggestion has been adopted in a recently published classification#R, on which the following sequence is based. See also under Calidris pugnax (below).
Name Erolia, often used in the past in North America, is a synonym of Calidris.
Formerly referred to as Capella, because this name was erroneously thought to pre-date Gallinago.
Sometimes accorded family status, Phalaropodidae#R, but taxa involved appear to be sister to the remaining taxa in subfamily Tringinae#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Phalaropus, but genetically distinct, and with several ecological and morphological differences; possibly quite close to Tringa.
Often subsumed within Tringa; molecular evidence, however, places it basal to that clade and closest to Phalaropus#R.
Sometimes included in Tringa, but recent molecular study indicated that the two are almost certainly sister-genera#R.
Sometimes considered to include Actitis, but recent molecular study indicated that the two are almost certainly sister-genera#R. Also incorporates previously recognized genera Heteroscelus and Catoptrophorus#R.
Previously placed in Gruiformes, but now universally accepted as belonging in Charadriiformes#R#R#R.
Differs from Turnix in morphology, ecology and behaviour; shape and structure, especially of wing and tail, and colour pattern of upperwing quite different.
Previously placed in its own superfamily, mainly on grounds of plumage of downy chicks; sometimes grouped with Laridae or (because of burrow-nesting habits) with Alcidae. Few recent studies have included material for this species#R, but nowadays normally considered closest to Glareolidae#R, and recent molecular work supports a sister-relationship for these two#R.
Often subsumed within Rhinoptilus, or sometimes Cursorius, but shows significant differences in behaviour and syringeal morphology#R.
Forms an apparent link between genera Cursorius and Glareola.
Previously included within Larus (which see), but differs in its compressed bill, its long, slender tarsi, and its incised webs between the long toes; recently resurrected on basis of genetic data#R#R.
Previously included within Larus (which see); recently resurrected on basis of genetic data#R#R. Apparently sister to Rhodostethia#R.
Apparently sister to Hydrocoloeus#R, and sometimes merged into it, but, although there are many phenotypic and behavioural similarities between them, they show significant differences in adult plumage.
Recent study found this genus to be sister to Pagophila#R, despite entirely different plumages.
Osteologically quite distinct from Larus; considered by some intermediate between the gulls and the skuas (Stercorariidae). Recent study found this genus to be sister to Xema#R, despite entirely different plumages.
Incorporates Chroicocephalus, Leucophaeus and Ichthyaetus; several other genera, including Saundersilarus and Hydrocoloeus, have often been included in Larus, as occasionally have Xema and even Rissa, but all of these appear distinct. Recent genetic studies found that Larus as previously constituted was polyphyletic#R#R; some workers propose solving this by the removal of many species to other genera#R; a subsequent study, with much larger sample analysed, concluded that, in order to retain the monophyly of Larus, only two species (saundersi and minutus) would need to be moved to different genera#R, an arrangement followed here.
Previously included in Sterna. Genetic data indicate that the four species now placed in this genus form a monophyletic group, which is the outgroup to all other terns#R, prompting the resurrection of Onychoprion.
Along with Onychoprion, Sternula, Hydroprogne, Chlidonias and Thalasseus, often merged into Sterna; behaviour intermediate between typical terns and crested terns, and unique combination of characters supports separate generic treatment. Recent genetic analysis also supports the retention of Gelochelidon#R.
Along with Onychoprion, Sternula, Gelochelidon, Chlidonias and Thalasseus, often merged into Sterna on basis primarily of ethological evidence; differs from all other terns, however, in massive, heavy bill. Recognition of monotypic Hydroprogne supported also by molecular evidence#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Sterna, but genetic study supports its retention#R.
Sometimes treated as including one or more of the genera Onychoprion, Sternula, Gelochelidon, Hydroprogne, Chlidonias and Thalasseus.
Often subsumed within Sterna, but recent genetic data support its recognition#R. Species placed herein share certain common features of morphology which set them apart from other terns.
Often subsumed within Stercorarius#R#R, but recent phylogenetic study based on skeletal morphology#R indicates that these four species represent a monophyletic genus, sister of which is Stercorarius pomarinus. All skua taxa of S oceans are very closely related, with at least some gene flow among several populations#R.
Incorporates Endomychura, which has occasionally been used for a few of the murrelet species.
In the past, listed as monospecific genus Plautus, but this name is unavailable.
Affinities of many species in this genus are uncertain; research required in order to clarify relationships.
Closely allied to Ninox, and sometimes merged with it, but wings more rounded.
Mourer-Chauviré et al.
, 1994Relationships uncertain; placed near Glaucidium on the basis of osteology and DNA.
Recent study of genetic data indicated that, while this genus is monophyletic, a major division exists between New World species and most of the Old World taxa#R, with proposal that latter be separated in genus Taenioglaux. As a consequence, Old World species, with exception of first four below (G. passerinum, G. brodiei, G. perlatum and G. tephronotum), have been placed in Taenioglaux by some recent authors#R; here considered more appropriate at present time to await further research and more extensive sampling of taxa.
Sequence of species in this genus is adopted in an attempt to conform to the findings of several recent molecular-phylogenetic studies#R#R, notwithstanding difficulty that a considerable number of taxa have not yet been sampled. Relationships of many species remain uncertain. Includes genus Mimizuku. Previously incorporated genus Megascops.
Genus until recently merged with Otus, but shown by molecular-biological studies to be very different, and eyes also much bigger.
Genus formerly merged with Asio; believed to be possibly closest to Asio, with similar contact calls, but often considered particularly close to Otus, while some authorities think that it is linked with Athene and Aegolius.
Previously subsumed within Otus, but differs in several respects#R.
Previously subsumed within Otus, but differs in several respects, including voice. Genetic analyses reveal clear division between New World species and Old World Otus#R, and indicate a sister relationship between Megascops and Psiloscops#R.
A replacement genus name for Gymnoglaux; latter shown to be an objective synonym of Gymnasio, both names currently being treated as synonyms of Megascops#R#R.
Genus considered by some to be related to Otus, and by others to Bubo. Recent studies, however, also suggest that it may have some link with Pulsatrix.
Sometimes subsumed within Bubo, or treated as a subgenus; separated on basis of slight differences in skull morphology. Molecular evidence suggests that Ketupa forms a robust clade within Bubo and therefore merits subgeneric ranking#R.
Relationships of genus uncertain, but appears closely related to Bubo; in recent monograph, given the rank of a subgenus within Bubo#R.
Frequently subsumed within Strix, to which it is genetically close, but differs in external ear structure.
Most morphological, behavioural and molecular affinities with other Accipitriformes, especially Accipitridae; some behavioural affinities with Ciconiidae. Proposed relationships to Cariamidae and other Gruiformes unsubstantiated.
Sometimes included within family Accipitridae, usually in its own subfamily, Pandioninae.
Recent phylogenetic study of family found that this genus and Gampsonyx were sister-taxa and were basal to all other accipitrid genera#R. Chelictinia commonly thought to be closely related to Elanus and sometimes subsumed within it.
Recent phylogenetic study found this genus and Elanus to be sister-taxa and basal to all other accipitrid genera#R. Formerly thought to be a falconid related to Polihierax and Spiziapteryx, but osteological evidence, scutellation and moult pattern, in addition to DNA data, place it near Elanus.
Commonly thought to be closely related to Elanus and sometimes subsumed within it, but differs in morphology.
Recent phylogenetic study found some evidence of relationship with Chondrohierax#R. Apparent affinity with Old World honey-buzzards (Pernis) and bazas (Aviceda) requires corroboration through molecular analyses.
Recent phylogenetic study found some evidence of fairly close relationship to Leptodon#R.
Not clearly or closely related to any other genus, but some similarities to Elanus and the Pernis group.
Recent study indicated that this genus is sister to Aviceda, with Australasian Henicopernis and Old World vultures Gypaetus and Neophron rather distant relatives#R.
In the past, commonly regarded as a primitive kite with milvine affinities. In recent decades, suggested to be part of an old endemic Australasian clade which also includes Lophoictinia and Henicopernis; the close relationship of these three genera was strongly supported by a recent phylogenetic study using DNA sequences#R, which concluded that the three belong together in Pernini, and indeed might perhaps be considered congeneric; the same study firmly rejected a suggested relationship of these three with three other species-poor Australo-Papuan genera, namely Harpyopsis, Erythrotriorchis and Megatriorchis.
Has been regarded as related to Milvus, but resemblance superficial and convergent. Now considered part of an endemic Australasian clade which also includes Hamirostra and Henicopernis (see above, Hamirostra).
Traditionally considered close to Pernis, although one molecular study suggested that it is rather distantly related to that genus#R. Now considered part of an endemic Australasian clade which also includes Hamirostra and Lophoictinia (see above, Hamirostra).
Recent genetic study indicated that this genus is sister to Pernis#R.
Affinities uncertain; previously thought to be most similar to likewise monotypic African Dryotriorchis. Placement with Pernis and relatives suggested in recent DNA study#R.
Relationships far from clear; has been associated variously with Spilornis, Dryotriorchis, Circus and Geranospiza, but also thought possibly closest to Melierax. Recent phylogenetic study indicated that apparent morphological and behavioural similarity to much smaller Neotropical Geranospiza due to convergence, rather than to genetic relatedness#R.
Has been considered intermediate between fish-eagles and vultures.
Doubtful affinities; usually considered closest to Neophron.
Possibly closest to Gypaetus; has been combined with Necrosyrtes, but differs in morphology and some aspects of behaviour.
Taxonomy extremely confused and tentative; complete revision and extensive study of relationships and species limits required. Research priorities include field studies of biology, especially with regard to prey and vocalizations, and laboratory analyses of DNA; extent of sympatry of various taxa requires full investigation.
May be most closely related to Asian Spilornis; previously thought to be most similar to Madagascan Eutriorchis. Recent molecular phylogeny, however, found that it falls within the clade of typical African snake-eating eagles of genus Circaetus#R.
Several features of morphology, in addition to juvenile plumage and feeding habits, indicate links with Circaetus.
Affinities uncertain. Recent molecular study suggested that it may be sister to Circaetus#R.
Sometimes combined with Neophron, but differs markedly in morphology and e.g. nesting behaviour.
Sequence of species in following list is based on that suggested in recent phylogenetic and phylogeographical study#R.
Sometimes considered to incorporate genera Sarcogyps, Trigonoceps and Torgos.
Affinities uncertain; formerly placed in Falconidae. Recent DNA study indicated that this genus is closest to Harpyopsis, Morphnus and Harpia#R. Name often spelt Machaerhamphus, but present spelling has priority.
Traditionally considered related to Harpia and Pithecophaga. Recent phylogenetic study found that present genus, Morphnus and Harpia formed a well-defined clade, but were not close to Pithecophaga#R. Another recent phylogenetic study using DNA sequences#R reconfirmed relationship with Morphnus and Harpia and suggested that all three might be lumped into a single genus, perhaps also including even Macheiramphus; the same study firmly rejected a proposed clade of species-poor endemic Australo-Papuan genera comprising the pernine Hamirostra, Lophoictinia and Henicopernis, the hawks Erythrotriorchis and Megatriorchis (both close to Accipiter), and present genus.
One recent phylogenetic study found that this genus, Harpyopsis and Harpia formed a well-defined clade#R. Another molecular study suggested that Morphnus was hardly separable from Harpia and that the two should perhaps be merged#R.
One recent phylogenetic study found that this genus, Harpyopsis and Morphnus formed a well-defined clade#R. Another molecular study suggested that it was so similar to Morphnus as to be hardly separable from it, and that the two should perhaps be merged#R.
Sometimes merged with Spizaetus (sensu lato), but skeletal anatomy recalls Harpia. In study of Spizaetus and its presumed close relatives, present genus suggested as being part of a clade of American and African hawk-eagles that included several members of Spizaetus (sensu lato), as well as some species traditionally placed in Lophaetus, Aquila and Hieraaetus#R.
Asian genus previously included within Spizaetus, but recent studies support its recognition as separate from American taxa#R#R.
Molecular studies indicate that this taxon occupies a phylogenetic position isolated from other hawk-eagles#R#R.
One recent phylogeny considered present genus to be sister to a clade formed by Lophaetus, Aquila and Hieraaetus#R.
Following several independent phylogenetic studies#R#R#R, former monotypic genera Oroaetus and Spizastur now incorporated in this genus, and Asian hawk-eagles, previously placed in Spizaetus, are not close to latter and are transferred to resurrected genus Nisaetus#R.
Affinities uncertain. Some molecular studies indicate that this genus is member of a clade that includes also Afrotropical Lophaetus and the Eurasian spotted eagles now placed in Clanga (see below)#R; other molecular studies, however, suggest that it is a rather distantly related sister of Asian Nisaetus#R. Further research required.
Recent molecular study indicated that this monotypic genus is sister to Clanga#R. Has previously been thought to be closest to Spizaetus (sensu lato).
Previously included within Aquila, but recent phylogenetic study found it to fall outside that clade, as sister to Lophaetus or perhaps even congeneric#R. Recently proposed Aquiloides is a junior synonym#R.
Several recent phylogenetic studies have led to extensive reorganization of this genus, most notably in removal of species now placed in Clanga, and in redefining of limits with Hieraaetus (which see)#R#R#R#R.
Some systematists favour merging this genus into Aquila#R. Recent molecular study, however, indicated that two distinct lineages are involved, the smaller species forming a separate clade; the five species currently placed in this genus are closely related#R. Composition of these two genera has recently been reassessed and modified on the basis of several phylogenetic studies#R#R#R#R.
Recent molecular appraisal of all buteonine genera indicated that Kaupifalco is sister to the goshawks in genera Melierax, Micronisus and Urotriorchis#R. Already linked with Melierax on basis of plumage, behaviour and egg-yolk colour.
Sometimes treated as incorporating Micronisus. The two may be closely related to Urotriorchis, with Kaupifalco as sister to the three#R.
In the past, thought perhaps closely related to Accipiter. Recent study, however, indicates that it is closest to Melierax, and sometimes subsumed within latter; these two genera may be closely related to Urotriorchis, with Kaupifalco as sister to the three#R.
Distinctive, with no very close allies. May be closest to Circus, Accipiter and perhaps Buteo#R. Some similarities to Aviceda. Formerly thought to belong in same subgroup as Elanus.
Recent molecular analyses indicate that this genus may be embedded in Accipiter#R#R.
Traditionally linked with Accipiter, and has sometimes been merged into it; a close relationship of these genera was strongly supported by a recent phylogenetic study using DNA sequences#R, which also placed Megatriorchis with Accipiter but in a different clade from present genus; the same study firmly rejected a proposed old endemic Australasian clade consisting of Erythrotriorchis and Megatriorchis with four other species-poor Australo-Papuan genera, namely Hamirostra, Lophoictinia, Henicopernis and Harpyopsis.
Traditionally linked with Accipiter, and has sometimes been merged into it; a close relationship of these genera was strongly supported by a recent phylogenetic study using DNA sequences#R, which also placed Erythrotriorchis with Accipiter but in a different clade from present genus (see also Erythrotriorchis, above).
Traditionally placed close to Accipiter, or even merged therein; recent molecular appraisal indicates that Urotriorchis forms a clade with Melierax and Micronisus, with Kaupifalco as sister to these three#R.
Alternative spelling Ichthyophaga often used, but present spelling selected by First Reviser#R.
Subsumed within Milvus by some authors, but differs in plumage, voice and behaviour.
Traditionally considered to be allied to Buteogallus and Parabuteo, but morphological evidence#R suggests closer relationship to a group of largely Old World genera (Milvus, Haliastur, Icthyophaga, Haliaeetus) than to the New World genera; this relationship supported by recent genetic studies#R#R.
Probably allied to Neotropical “sub-buteonines”, rather than Afrotropical Polyboroides, but found in recent study to be convergent with latter#R. Name Ischnosceles used in past, but, although described a few years earlier than Geranospiza, it is best regarded as a forgotten name.
Highly specialized, with no clear taxonomic affinities to other genera. Recent studies suggested that it may be sister to Geranospiza, but with poor support#R; one study indicated that it belonged to a clade also containing Busarellus#R.
Subsumed within Rostrhamus by most recent authors, but hamatus shows marked differences in proportions and shape (especially in flight), style of flight, calls, display and habitat.
Normally included within Buteo (which see), or alternatively in Asturina, but recently resurrected for magnirostris, which was found to be basal to all buteos#R#R#R.
Genetic data#R#R#R#R suggest that Parabuteo may be sister to Buteo and that it lies outside main group of true buteos.
Recently erected#R in order to recognize plumage combination unique among buteonine hawks: overall dark grey plumage, black tail with single white medial band, and white underwings-coverts.
Incorporates Harpyhaliaetus, Heterospizias and Urubitinga.
Name Tachytriorchis sometimes used, but Geranoaetus has priority#R.
Previously subsumed within Leucopternis, but recent analysis indicates that it merits recognition for the three species listed below#R. Both genera, however, sometimes merged into Buteo.
Has sometimes been incorporated within Buteo. Recent phylogenetic analyses suggested that only the three species listed below belong in Leucopternis#R#R.
Previously incorporated several other genera, including e.g. Rupornis, Morphnarchus, Pseudastur, as well as Leucopternis and Buteogallus. Present arrangement based largely on recent molecular studies#R#R#R, but further modification likely.
No known close relatives. In the past, considered to belong within Coraciidae, where typically awarded its own separate subfamily, or placed in its own family close to Coraciidae and Brachypteraciidae. Recent molecular studies suggest that Leptosomus is sister to a large clade which contains Coraciiformes, Trogoniformes and Piciformes, but within which it is distant from Coraciidae and Brachypteraciidae#R; or that it may be sister to Strigidae, Falconidae or Trogoniformes#R#R#R.
Incorporates monospecific genus Heterotrogon.
Name sometimes erroneously emended to Hapalarpactes. Previously subsumed within Harpactes; both species differ, however, in plumage coloration and in having a red bill, as well as being the only Asian trogons with metallic tones in plumage, and at least one (A. mackloti) has song quite unlike that of any other trogonid; recent molecular study indicated that Apalharpactes is a relictual lineage only distantly related to other trogons#R.
Sometimes merged into Pharomachrus. Probably most closely related to Priotelus and Temnotrogon.
Often included within Priotelus, but differs significantly in bill pattern, plumage coloration and some morphological features.
Treatment of this family here is based largely on findings of recent comprehensive molecular phylogenetic analysis#R#R.
Usually merged into Tockus, within which often treated as a subgenus. Incorporates Rhynchaceros.
Often subsumed within Aceros, but closer to Horizocerus (formerly Tropicranus)#R.
Replacement for Tropicranus, having date priority over latter#R. Often merged into Tockus, or occasionally Berenicornis, but appears to be sufficiently distinct in behaviour and voice, as well as in some aspects of morphology, to merit separate treatment.
Previously subsumed within Ceratogymna, but genetic evidence supports separate generic treatment for the following smaller species.
Often subsumed within Buceros, but differs clearly in morphology, and in unique hooting call ending in loud cackle. Recent molecular study found Rhinoplax to be sister to Buceros#R, but it is retained owing to its extreme vocal and morphological divergence#R.
Previously synonymized with African Tockus, but differs in feeding behaviour at nest. In recent comprehensive molecular phylogeny#R, mtDNA tree indicated that two taxa presently placed in Ocyceros (griseus, gingalensis) form a clade with Anthracoceros malayanus, with O. birostris divergent; as birostris is type species of Ocyceros, griseus and gingalensis would have to be moved to Anthracoceros or placed with malayanus in separate genus. Here, genera Ocyceros and Anthracoceros are maintained in traditional format, but further molecular study is needed in order to resolve their evolutionary relationships.
Has sometimes been considered to incorporate Rhyticeros. Authorship previously attributed to J. E. Gray#R.
Until recently included within Rhyticeros or Aceros.
Recent molecular study found this genus to be sister to all other bee-eaters#R.
Incorporates Melittophagus, Bombylonax, Aerops, Dicrocercus and Meropiscus.
Previously subsumed within Brachypteracias, but differs genetically#R, as well as in morphology and behaviour. Sister to Uratelornis#R.
Appears to be closest to momotid genera Hylomanes and Baryphthengus, all perhaps having a common ancestor#R#R #R.
Appears to be close to Baryphthengus and also to tody genus Todus, all perhaps having a common ancestor#R#R #R.
Appears to be close to Hylomanes and to tody genus Todus, all perhaps having a common ancestor#R#R #R.
Sometimes merged into Ceyx or Corythornis; incorporates Myioceyx. Relationships to other kingfisher clades uncertain#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Ceryle, but both phylogenetic analysis#R and osteological evidence#R support recognition of separate genera.
Distinctive, with no close relatives; some authors have placed some or all members of Megaceryle in present genus, but both phylogenetic data#R and osteological evidence#R support recognition of separate genera.
Has been thought perhaps an early offshoot of Dacelo lineage, with some resemblance to Tanysiptera.
Sometimes merged into Halcyon; in the past, genus name given as Ramphalcyon, but Pelargopsis has priority.
Sometimes merged into Halcyon; incorporates Dacelalcyon and Monachalcyon.
Sometimes merged into Halcyon, or occasionally even into Todiramphus.
Includes Capricia and Sauromarptis, and sometimes Clytoceyx.
Very close to Dacelo and sometimes subsumed within it#R. Possibly related also to Melidora.
Close to Brachygalba, particularly B. lugubris, but segregated by foot morphology, elongated head feathers and gregarious behaviour.
Formerly considered sufficiently distinct to be placed in monotypic subfamily Jacameropinae, but this no longer considered warranted.
In the past was sometimes synonymized with Bucco.
Usually merged into Bucco. Generic name previously listed as Argicus, but Cyphos has priority (and is not excluded by homonymy, as previously thought)#R.
Genetic data indicate that Ramphastos is basal to all other genera in this family#R#R.
Molecular analyses suggest that this genus is sister to Andigena and Selenidera#R#R.
Several studies found this genus and Selenidera to be sister-genera#R#R#R, with Aulacorhynchus sister to the two#R#R.
Several studies found this genus and Andigena to be sister-genera#R#R#R, with Aulacorhynchus sister to the two#R#R.
Traditionally, all barbets were lumped into a single family under this name. In recent decades, increasing weight of evidence #R#R#R#R indicates: separate families should be recognized for species from America (Capitonidae), Asia (Megalaimidae) and Africa (Lybiidae); American barbets further divisible by recognition of aberrant family Semnornithidae; and American barbets are closer to toucans than to Old World barbets.
Traditionally lumped into Capitonidae (which see). Genetic data suggest inconclusively that it may be sister to Ramphastidae#R#R or perhaps to both Ramphastidae and Capitonidae#R#R.
Traditionally lumped into Capitonidae (which see).
Relationships unclear. Has been considered close to African Gymnobucco on basis of plumage, voice and colonial nesting, but genetic evidence indicates that these similarites are convergent, and that the two genera are not closely related#R. Original spelling has often been erroneously emended to Calorhamphus.
Replaces Megalaima; recent study found Psilopogon to be nested within Megalaima#R and former has priority. Incorporates Xantholaema and Mesobucco.
Traditionally lumped into Capitonidae (which see).
Genetic data place this as basal to all other African barbets#R. Previous studies suggested it was: basal to all barbets, on morphological grounds#R; or, using cytochrome b, basal to New World Capitonidae and Ramphastidae#R.
Genetic data subdivide these taxa into three clades#R: Buccanodon, Gymnobucco and Stactolaema (with Cryptolybia); Pogoniulus; and Tricholaema and Lybius (with Pogonornis); in same study, Trachylaemus was included within Trachyphonus, in subfamily Trachyphoninae.
Has been thought to be related both to Pogoniulus and to Tricholaema; larger than former, similar in size to latter but lacks bill “teeth”, and vocally distinct from both; genetic data suggest not closely related to either#R.
Very similar to Stactolaema, but some minor differences in morphology, plumage and some vocalizations.
Has been considered close to Asian Caloramphus on basis of plumage, voice and colonial nesting, but genetic evidence indicates that these similarites are convergent, and that the two genera are not closely related#R.
Includes Smilorhis.
Has commonly been included within Lybius, but such treatment renders latter genus paraphyletic#R.
Sometimes included within Trachyphonus; genetic data support its placement there#R, although plumage, behaviour and vocalizations suggest it is distinct#R.
Previously subsumed within Sasia, but morphologically and genetically distinct#R.
May merit its own monospecific subfamily#R. No obvious close relatives. Feather preserved in amber 15–20 million years old (oldest picid fossil), found in Dominican Republic, was considered, on basis of its structure, to belong to a very close relative of modern-day Nesoctites#R.
Molecular data indicate that this genus is sister to all other genera in subfamily Picinae#R#R, such a relationship being supported by recent cladistic analysis of 69 morphological and behavioural characters#R.
Incorporates Phloeoceastes. Recent molecular studies indicate that Campephilus is related to Asian genera Blythipicus and Chrysocolaptes (latter including Reinwardtipicus)#R#R#R, and that its nuclear genome is probably a mix of two unrelated lineages (with Sphyrapicus/Melanerpes)#R.
Incorporates Reinwardtipicus#R. Closely related to Blythipicus.
Apparently forms a clade of Indomalayan taxa together with Dinopium, Micropternus and Meiglyptes#R.
In the past the sole species was usually placed alone in present genus, but was subsequently included in Celeus on grounds of plumage pattern, structure, behaviour and voice#R, although not very closely related to other, Neotropical species of latter genus and believed possibly closer to Picus; recent molecular studies, however, found it to belong in separate clade with SE Asian Meiglyptes, these two genera being sister to S & SE Asian Dinopium#R.
Previously included in Picus; molecular analysis#R indicates that these species represent a different clade, closer to Meiglyptes than to Picus, a finding supported by more recent data#R.
Probably closest to Campethera#R#R#R; recent molecular investigation found this taxon to form a clade with the two Campethera species (nivosa and caroli) sampled#R.
Previously included Chrysophlegma, which was found in recent molecular analyses to represent a clearly divergent, separate clade#R (see above).
Previously included several additional species now placed in closely related Colaptes (see below).
Incorporates Chrysoptilus and Nesoceleus. Also includes several species formerly placed in Piculus, as that previous arrangement renders both Piculus and Colaptes paraphyletic#R#R.
Recent molecular analysis#R found that Old World Dryocopus and Mulleripicus were closer to each other than either is to the New World Dryocopus, prompting the merging of all in Dryocopus. With retention here of Mulleripicus, genus Hylatomus is resurrected for the New World taxa hitherto placed in Dryocopus.
Recent molecular analysis#R found that Old World Dryocopus and Mulleripicus were closer to each other than either is to the New World Dryocopus, prompting the merging of all in Dryocopus. With retention here of Mulleripicus, genus Hylatomus is resurrected for the New World taxa hitherto placed in Dryocopus.
Recent molecular analysis#R found that Old World Dryocopus and Mulleripicus were closer to each other than either is to the New World Dryocopus, prompting the merging of all in Dryocopus. With retention here of Mulleripicus, genus Hylatomus is resurrected for the New World taxa hitherto placed in Dryocopus.
Closely related to Xiphidiopicus and Melanerpes#R.
Molecular data suggest that this genus is sister to Melanerpes, and is close also to Sphyrapicus#R.
Incorporates Tripsurus, and the four monotypic genera Leuconerpes, Asyndesmus, Linneopicus and Trichopicus; barred species sometimes separated in Centurus.
Previously included Leiopicus, some Dryobates species, and sometimes Dendrocopos. Incorporates Yungipicus.
Incorporates Thripias, Chloropicus and Mesopicos, and also, tentatively, Ipophilus, recent molecular analyses having indicated that no justification exists for maintaining these recently revived genera#R. Also includes Polipicus.
Previously subsumed within Dendrocopos or Picoides. Recently revived following findings of recent molecular studies that the following three species form a separate and distinct clade#R#R.
Various DNA studies have indicated that many species previously included in Picoides/Dendrocopos form distinct clades, separate from others in those genera, a finding strongly supported by the most recent analyses#R. Genus Dryobates is revived for some of these species; Leuconotopicus and Veniliornis may also be part of this assemblage, although here retained as separate clades.
Recent molecular analyses#R found that all species previously placed in Veniliornis could be united with most Picoides and three (or four) Dendrocopos in a greatly expanded Dryobates; an alternative option, with the advantage of avoiding polyphyletic genera, was to split this large group into three genera, namely Dryobates, Leuconotopicus and Veniliornis, as herein.
Restricted to the New World tropics. Probably closest to Dendrocopos; molecular phylogenetic study#R indicated that present genus and Picoides are reciprocally paraphyletic, and that, contrary to some earlier beliefs, present genus is not closely related to Piculus.
Sometimes merged into Picoides. Incorporates monotypic genera Hypopicus and Sapheopipo.
Distinctive genus, closest to Micrastur#R#R#R; sometimes awarded its own monotypic tribe or subfamily.
Distinctive genus, closest to Herpetotheres#R#R#R; specialized for life in dense forest, having long tail and short wings (for manoeuvrability), large ear openings and facial ruff (for hunting by sound).
Has been associated with Old World Polihierax or, alternatively, with Neotropical Micrastur, Herpetotheres and caracaras; sometimes placed in separate subfamily (or even family#R) alongside Herpetotheres alone. Although morphological data suggested that Spiziapteryx was closest to falcons (Falco and relatives)#R, genetic data indicate that it is closest to the caracaras#R#R; recent DNA study suggested that it belongs with latter in Polyborini#R.
Generally thought to be closely related to Phalcoboenus, and less closely to Milvago, both of which are sometimes included within present genus. Genus previously listed as Polyborus, but this name is unidentifiable#R#R.
Previously included in Daptrius, but differs significantly in syringeal morphology, habitat and behaviour, and distinct genetically, being closer to Caracara#R#R#R#R.
Closely related to Caracara and in past sometimes merged therein.
Has occasionally been included in Caracara; together with Daptrius, the closest of caracara genera to Falco. Previously included Phalcoboenus chimango (which see).
Previously included Ibycter, but the two differ significantly in syringeal morphology, habitat and behaviour, and are distinct genetically#R#R#R#R. Closest to Milvago.
Syringeal morphology suggests that this genus is closely related to Polihierax#R#R; apparently closest to Afrotropical Polihierax semitorquatus#R.
Syringeal morphology suggests close relationship to Microhierax#R#R.
Incoporates various older genera/subgenera, e.g. Cerchneis, Tinnunculus, Dissodectes, Aesalon, Nesierax, Hieracidea, Ieracidea, Gennaia, Hierofalco, Rhynchodon.
Highly distinctive genus#R, most closely related to Nestor, as confirmed by recent phylogenetic work#R#R. The two genera have variously been treated as separate tribes#R; subfamilies within Psittacidae#R or (as here) within Strigopidae#R#R; or even separate families#R. Although the family-group names based on these genera were both introduced in the same publication, the name Strigopidae has priority, as introduced at a higher taxonomic rank.
Sometimes treated as a separate family; see Strigops (above).
Relationships long debated; regarded by many authors as diminutive cockatoo on basis of morphology; during period 1963–1975 several workers put forward convincing case for its grouping among parrots of Platycercini, but some morphological and genetic studies (and particularly results of isozyme electrophoresis) indicated close relationship to the cockatoos, probably meriting separation in monotypic subfamily or tribe within Cacatuidae. Recent multi-locus molecular phylogeny supports this, finding that present genus is sole member of a third major (and basal) clade within the cockatoos, subfamily Nymphicinae#R. Leptolophus is a junior synonym of Nymphicus.
Previously included in Calyptorhynchus, but DNA study indicates that recognition is warranted#R.
Previously included in subfamily Calyptorhynchinae, but recent molecular phylogeny places this genus in Cacatuinae#R. Tribal name based on junior synonym Microglossus; Proboscigerini is a junior synonym of Microglossini#R#R.
Callocorydon is a junior synonym. Recent multi-locus molecular study found present genus and Eolophus to be sister-taxa, perhaps better merged (Callocephalon has priority)#R.
Sometimes included in Cacatua, but recognized on basis of osteological and morphological criteria, supported by behavioural and biochemical studies. May belong in Callocephalon (see above).
Alternative name Kakatoe now obsolete and officially suppressed#R. Includes Lophochroa, but see under C. leadbeateri, below.
Recent reappraisal of higher taxonomy of parrots#R proposed arrangement into three superfamilies, here treated as families (Strigopidae, Cacatuidae, Psittacidae); same study split Psittacidae, as here defined, into three families, with additional recognition of Psittrichasidae (Psittrichas to Coracopsis, below) and Psittaculidae (Psephotus to Micropsitta, below); in present work, separation of these families considered to require further study and perhaps additional support. In the past, present family was often split into two, with recognition of family Loriidae; at the other extreme, it was sometimes considered to include all Psittaciformes.
Older genus name Pyrrhulopsis has been demonstrated to refer to species currently placed herein, but due to long and almost universal use of present genus name, as well as confusion generated surrounding use of Pyrrhulopsis (see Prosopeia), application has been filed with ICZN for suppression of name Pyrrhulopsis for purposes of priority and its conversion into an objective junior synonym of Touit#R#R.
Often included in Bolborhynchus. Genus Amoropsittaca subsumed within latter or within present genus.
Some recent molecular studies indicated a sister relationship between Bolborhynchus lineola and Nannopsittaca#R#R, another study finding that Psilopsiagon was sister to these two genera#R; a different analysis suggested a sister relationship between Touit and Nannopsittaca (although Bolborhynchus was not sampled)#R.
Recent molecular studies suggested that present genus and Brotogeris are sister taxa#R#R, a relationship supported by subsequent analyses#R#R.
Previously included Pyrilia, but such arrangement found to be not monophyletic#R#R.
Formerly listed as Gypopsitta, but present name has priority#R. Sister genus to Hapalopsittaca#R#R. Previously subsumed within Pionopsitta (see above), but the following seven medium-sized, short-tailed South American parrots together represent a separate group to which that genus is sister#R.
Replacement for name Salvatoria, which has been shown to be preoccupied#R.
Incorporates Chrysotis. Genetic studies have indicated that relationships within present genus are not as traditionally believed; sequence of species in following list reflects recent findings#R#R.
Appears not to be closely related to any other genus#R.
Recent molecular studies indicate that this genus and Deroptyus are sister-taxa#R#R#R.
Recent molecular studies indicate that this genus and Pionites are sister-taxa#R#R#R.
Previously synonymized with Aratinga, but DNA studies support separation#R#R.
Includes Nandayus; previously included also Eupsittula, Conuropsis, Guaruba and Psittacara.
In the past commonly subsumed within Ara, but separated genetically#R.
Formerly subsumed within Ara, but differs in morphology, voice and behaviour.
Previously incorporated within Ara. Includes Propyrrhura as a junior synonym#R.
Formerly included Cyanopsitta, Orthopsitta, Primolius (including Propyrrhura) and Diopsittaca.
Genetic data indicate that this taxon is part of a group that includes also Guaruba and Diopsittaca#R. Has sometimes been included within Aratinga.
Sometimes spelt as Guarouba, due to dual original spellings; present version selected by First Reviser#R. Often subsumed within Aratinga. Recent DNA studies indicate close relationship to Diopsittaca#R#R#R#R.
Often subsumed within Ara. Recent DNA studies indicate sister relationship to Guaruba#R#R#R#R.
Previously included within Aratinga, but differs genetically#R#R#R.
Relationships uncertain and taxonomic position somewhat controversial; has been associated with Loriinae. Recent molecular study suggested that this genus shares a common ancestor with geographically distant Coracopsis#R, and these taxa have recently been suggested to form a separate family#R; Psittrichadinae is an alternative spelling#R#R. See also under Family Psittacidae.
Recent molecular study indicated that this genus shares a common ancestor with geographically distant Psittrichas#R.
This and all the taxa following below have recently been suggested to form a separate family#R. See also under Family Psittacidae.
Commonly considered to include Psephotellus, but recent data show they are genetically distinct#R#R.
Commonly included within Psephotus, but recent data show they are genetically distinct#R#R.
Sometimes included within Platycercus.
Sometimes considered to include Purpureicephalus. See also Eunymphicus, below.
Sometimes merged into Platycercus (e.g. recently#R).
Proposal to replace this name with older Pyrrhulopsis#R#R#R has been overturned, as that genus has been demonstrated to refer to species currently placed in Touit#R#R#R (which see). See also under Eunymphicus, below.
Closely related to Cyanoramphus, and sometimes subsumed within it; Prosopeia is sister to these two, and Platycercus may be the next closest to this clade#R.
Molecular data indicate that this taxon is closest to Eunymphicus (see above).
Includes Geopsittacus. Recent molecular study indicates that present genus is closely allied to Neopsephotus and Neophema, the three probably a sister-group to the core platycercines#R.
Often merged into Neophema, but biochemical data provide additional support for recognizing it. Recent molecular study indicates that present genus is closely allied to Pezoporus and Neophema, the three probably a sister-group to the core platycercines#R.
Recent molecular study indicates that present genus is closely allied to Pezoporus and Neopsephotus, the three probably a sister-group to the core platycercines#R.
Osteologically very similar to Vini and may not merit recognition.
Formerly listed under later name Domicella, because the name Lorius Boddaert, 1783 was applicable to Eclectus; but Boddaert’s name (an emendation of Larius) was officially suppressed in 1970#R, leaving Vigors’s as the correct name for present genus.
Chalcopsittacus is an unjustified emendation#R.
All members of this genus very closely related, forming a species-group.
Sometimes considered to include Psitteuteles. In past, authorship of present genus erroneously attributed to Vigors & Horsfield, 1827#R.
Sometimes subsumed within Cyclopsitta (or Opopsitta).
Incorporates Opopsitta as a junior synonym#R; Psittaculirostris sometimes included in present genus.
Recent molecular study suggested that this genus as currently constituted may be polyphyletic#R.
Genus name formerly given as Lorius Boddaert, 1783, although original spelling, was “Larius”; this name (either spelling) officially suppressed in 1970, giving way to Eclectus for present species, and leaving genus name Lorius Vigors, 1825, available for “Domicella” lories#R.
Recent study suggested that this genus might be embedded within Psittacula#R.
Recent study suggested that, as currently constituted, this genus may be polyphyletic and that Tanygnathus may be embedded within it#R.
Genetic studies#R#R#R indicate that this monospecific genus is basal to all other passerines.
Along with Hydrornis, previously included in Pitta, but genetic study#R suggests that recognition of three genera is more appropriate.
Along with Erythropitta, previously included in Pitta, but genetic study#R suggests that recognition of three genera is more appropriate.
Previously incorporated genera Erythropitta and Hydrornis, but genetic study#R suggests that recognition of three genera is more appropriate.
Authorship disputed and sometimes attributed to Vigors & Horsfield#R#R, but external evidence (including that of Horsfield) supports use of current version#R.
Often merged into Eurylaimus, but significant morphological differences. Authorship and date disputed#R#R.
Previously included in either Pipridae or Tyrannidae, both likewise occurring exclusively in New World; recent genetic data, however, indicate that it belongs with the Old World suboscines#R#R#R, being closest to Eurylaimidae and Philepittidae, and meriting its own family#R#R.
Previously included in Eurylaimidae, but shown to be more distant to the taxa currently placed therein than are Philepittidae and Sapayoidae#R.
Name coined by Raffles in paper read out in Dec 1820, but not published until Nov 1822; in interim, pre-empted (presumably unintentionally) by Horsfield in a paper published in Jun 1822#R.
Recent phylogenetic studies#R#R#R have led to internal clarification of family and its division into two subfamilies, Thamnophilinae and Myrmornithinae; subsequent work has erected a third, Euchrepomidinae (see below, Euchrepomis).
Until very recently included in Terenura, but recent findings based on morphological details, DNA, behaviour, vocalizations and habitat ecology indicate that these taxa form a separate lineage, meriting not only a distinct genus but even a new subfamily, which is basal to the family#R.
Recent phylogenetic studies#R#R#R have led to distribution of taxa included herein into five tribes, Microrhopiini, Formicivorini, Thamnophilini, Pithyini and Pyriglenini.
Forms a clade with Aprositornis, Ammonastes and Myrmophylax#R.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R; distinguished by plumage, long bill, voice and tail-flicking behaviour. See also Myrmorchilus.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R#R; characterized by plumage pattern, voice and behaviour. See also Myrmorchilus.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently resurrected#R. See also Myrmorchilus.
Genetic studies suggest that this genus is close to Myrmorchilus and Myrmophylax#R#R.
Sister to Epinecrophylla (“stipple-throated antwrens”)#R.
Species of this new genus#R (“stipple-throated antwrens”) were previously included in Myrmotherula, but genetic studies#R indicate that they form a distinct clade; they also differ morphologically.
Morphological, vocal and molecular studies indicate that, with exception of F. iheringi, all species placed in this genus form a well-defined group#R.
Previously incorporated genera Epinecrophylla, Rhopias and Isleria.
Previously included all species now placed in Euchrepomis (which see), but they were found not to be related to Terenura#R.
Previously included in Myrmotherula, but only distantly related to it and phenotypically distinct from all other thamnophilids#R.
Relationships to other genera unclear. Species currently included appear to be related on basis of morphology and behaviour, although their nest architecture is somewhat variable.
Relationships uncertain: preliminary evidence suggested affiliation with Thamnophilus, and morphological characteristics have connected it with Thamnomanes; more recent phylogenetic analysis found it to be sister to Herpsilochmus#R.
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Taraba, the two forming a clade with Hypoedaleus, Batara, Mackenziaena and Frederickena; all have been linked to Thamnophilus on basis of external morphology, especially strongly hooked bill.
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Cymbilaimus (see above).
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Batara; see also Cymbilaimus (above).
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Hypoedaleus; see also Cymbilaimus (above).
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Frederickena; see also Cymbilaimus (above).
Genetic data#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Mackenziaena; see also Cymbilaimus (above).
Includes proposed genus Sakesphoroides (see S. cristatus, below).
Sequence of species is based on a recent analysis of historical diversification in the genus#R.
Until very recently included all species now placed in Cercomacroides (see below), but the two groups were found not to be sisters#R. Confusion over type species of this genus recently clarified#R.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R#R; apparently sister to Cercomacroides#R (see below).
Recently split from Cercomacra#R on basis of comprehensive molecular study#R. Genus is feminine due to original usage by describers#R.
Apparent close sister relationship to Hypocnemis#R corroborated by more recent studies#R#R.
Forms an obligate ant-following clade with genera Pithys, Willisornis, Phlegopsis, Oneillornis, Gymnopithys and Rhegmatorhina#R. Recent study#R suggests that present genus is sister to Pithys.
See Phaenostictus (above). Recent study#R suggests that present genus is sister to Phaenostictus.
Recently separated from Hylophylax, on basis of molecular study#R; see also Phaenostictus (above). Willisornis is a replacement name for Dichropogon C. Chubb, 1918, which is invalid, being preoccupied by Dichropogon Bezzi, 1910 (a genus of dipteran flies of family Asilidae)#R.
See Phaenostictus (above). Incorporates Skutchia (see P. borbae). Phlogopsis P. L. Sclater 1858, often cited as a synonym, is merely an unjustified emendation.
See Phaenostictus (above). Hitherto included in Gymnopithys, but recently split, based on phylogenetic study using DNA, plumage, behaviour, ecology and vocalizations#R. See also Rhegmatorhina (below).
See Phaenostictus (above). Until recently, included taxa now placed in Oneillornis (see above).
See Phaenostictus (above). Forms a clade with Oneillornis and Gymnopithys, each genus representing a subclade; all could theoretically be merged into Gymnopithys but in view of considerable differences in plumage, present genus should be retained, which requires erection of the new genus Oneillornis in order to preserve monophyly#R. Together, all members of present genus form a well-defined species group.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently resurrected#R. Close relationship of all included taxa suggested by similarities in plumage, vocalizations and nest architecture.
Phylogenetic study#R found this genus and Hypocnemoides to be sisters. Close relationship of the three species in Hylophylax suggested by morphology, vocalizations and nest architecture.
Appears to be sister to Hylophylax#R.
Phylogenetic study#R placed this genus closest to Schistocichla; more recent analysis#R indicates that Schistocichla should be subsumed into Myrmelastes (which see), and that present genus is sister to Myrmelastes.
Recently resurrected, as a result of traditional Myrmeciza (which see) being broken up#R; also incorporates, from traditional Percnostola (which see), a subgroup that was sometimes recognized as a separate genus, Schistocichla.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R#R; forms a clade with Ampelornis and Sipia.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R; forms a clade with Poliocrania and Sipia.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently resurrected#R; forms a clade with Poliocrania and Ampelornis.
Until very recently, normally treated as a large, varied genus containing almost all taxa now placed in genera Aprositornis, Ammonastes, Myrmophylax, Sciaphylax, Myrmoderus, Myrmelastes, Poliocrania, Ampelornis, Sipia, Akletos and Hafferia. Validity of this conglomeration had long been questioned, and genetic data have recently shown it to be a polyphyletic grouping#R#R; on basis of a study using molecular, morphological, behavioural and ecological data, taxa now redistributed among twelve genera situated in three different tribes of subfamily Thamnophilinae#R.
Genetic study#R suggests closest relatives may be Percnostola, Akletos and Hafferia.
Has been considered perhaps sister to Rhopornis on basis of voice and behaviour. Genetic study#R suggests closest relatives may be Gymnocichla, Percnostola, Akletos and Hafferia.
Relationships uncertain; possible close relationship to Pyriglena indicated by voice and behaviour.
Traditional interpretation of this genus was recently reappraised and the taxa redistributed into three groups#R: two species currently retained herein; a group in past sometimes separated as genus Schistocichla, and now reassigned to Myrmelastes (which see); and a single taxon (lophotes) transferred to Myrmoborus.
Recently resurrected, having traditionally been included in Myrmeciza (which see); when the species currently included herein were split generically#R they were initially placed in new genus Inundicola, but this proved to be a junior synonym of Akletos#R.
Traditionally included in Myrmeciza (which see), but recently split as a new genus#R.
Relationships uncertain; recent molecular phylogeny#R suggests that it may be closest to Pygiptila and Thamnistes.
Previously included in Formicariidae, alongside taxa currently separated as family Grallariidae, but on basis of DNA, as well as morphological and vocal data, found instead to be sister to Conopophaga#R#R.
Previously included in Rhinocryptidae, but genetic analyses indicate that it merits elevation to its own family#R#R#R.
Previously included in Formicariidae, but DNA studies indicate that the four genera currently included herein form a monophyletic group, whereas current members of Formicariidae may be closer to some members of Rhinocryptidae#R#R.
On basis of DNA analysis, sister to the other three genera in this family#R#R.
On basis of DNA analysis, sister to Myrmothera#R#R. In past, often subsumed within Grallaria.
On basis of DNA analysis, sister to the clade formed by Hylopezus and Myrmothera#R#R.
Recent phylogenetic study recommends division into two subfamilies, Rhinocryptinae and Scytalopodinae#R.
Shows certain structural features similar to those of Melanopareia (Melanopareiidae), but on basis of biochemistry belongs with typical tapaculos.
Separated from Scytalopus on basis of genetic findings#R#R; sister to Merulaxis. Loudsongs clearly different from those of Scytalopus#R.
Sister-genus to Eleoscytalopus#R. Publication date problematic#R.
In past merged with Scytalopus, but continued treatment as separate genus corroborated by recent genetic analysis#R.
Previously treated as including all members of Grallariidae and Pittasoma, but DNA studies indicate that the previous grouping was paraphyletic#R#R, and that the two genera currently retained herein may be closer to some members of Rhinocryptidae#R.
Genetic data#R#R support earlier findings that Sclerurus and Geositta are sisters, and are basal to all other furnariid genera; in recent years, sometimes treated as a separate family.
Frequently treated as a separate family, although always closely linked to other current members of Furnariidae.
Newly erected genus#R, previously included in Deconychura.
Sequence of species follows findings of recent phylogenetic studies#R#R combined with correlated evolution of bill morphology and song#R.
Proposed close relationship with Campylorhamphus refuted by subsequent analyses#R#R#R.
Sequence of species based on the findings of a recent multilocus phylogenetic analysis#R.
Previously subsumed into Xiphorhynchus. Confusion in past over identity of name, as original description was shortly afterwards (1837) attached by Swainson to sketch of type species, misidentified as X. ocellatus; recent reassessment confirmed D. picus as type species and underlined morphological distinctness of Dendroplex#R, its validity as a separate genus being further supported by analysis of molecular data#R. DNA analysis indicates closer affinity to Campylorhamphus and Lepidocolaptes than to Xiphorhynchus.
Until recently included in Campylorhamphus, but recent study found that its single species differs genetically, morphologically and in habitat#R#R. Forms a clade with Drymornis and Lepidocolaptes.
Sister-genus to Drymotoxeres, the two forming a clade with Lepidocolaptes#R#R.
Recent phylogenetic work supports subdivision into 5–6 clades (herein tribes), depending on inclusion or exclusion of Xenopini#R.
Different genetic datasets variously suggest present taxon is closer to either Dendrocolaptinae or Furnariinae, and sometimes all three are awarded separate families#R#R#R#R.
Recently resurrected and redefined, now comprising two species formerly in Upucerthia, as well as formerly monospecific Chilia and Eremobius; current grouping based on plumage features and genetic analyses#R#R#R, backed up by subsequent evolutionary study#R.
Previously thought to be closely related to Margarornis, Premnoplex and Roraimia, but differs greatly, especially in behaviour#R. Genetic studies#R#R#R#R indicate that it is closer to Pseudocolaptes; see also Tarphonomus (below).
These two species were previously placed in Upucerthia and then in Ochetorhynchus, but found to be unrelated to either#R. Subsequent genetic analyses#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Premnornis, with Pseudocolaptes sister to that pair.
Recent genetic studies#R#R indicate that this genus is sister to Phleocryptes and Limnornis.
Genetic data#R#R reveal that this genus forms a clade with Limnornis, the two being sister to Lochmias.
In past, sometimes considered to include Limnoctites, but the two are not closely related#R. See also Phleocryptes (above).
Previously placed in Upucerthia, but found not to be closely related to any members of that genus; separation in newly erected genus#R corroborated by subsequent studies#R.
Traditionally treated as more speciose, but molecular studies#R#R have led to removal of several species variously to Ochetorhynchus, Tarphonomus and Geocerthia.
Sometimes merged into Xenops, from which it shows only minor differences in plumage characters, although the two differ clearly in vocalizations; genetic data#R#R#R support recognition of separate genera. Although original description of genus cited misidentified type species, textual description clearly refers to present genus#R.
Genetic data#R suggest that this genus as presently constituted may be paraphyletic.
Sometimes merged into a broadly defined Philydor, but genetic data#R#R corroborate separation.
Sometimes merged into a broad Philydor, while foraging behaviour and voice have suggested to some that it may be closer to Thripadectes than present sequence suggests. Incorporates Simoxenops.
Incorporates genus Hylocryptus, as indicated by genetic analyses#R#R.
Incorporates Hyloctistes, which was found by genetic analyses to be nested within present genus#R#R.
Sister-genus to Margarornis, based on morphology and behaviour#R, as well as DNA studies#R#R.
Until recently, naming of genus and species erroneously ascribed to Des Murs, 1847#R.
Incorporates Oreophylax and Schizoeaca, following comprehensive phylogenetic analyses#R.
Genetic analyses#R#R show this genus to be sister to Metopothrix and Xenerpestes.
DNA data#R#R show this genus to be sister to Xenerpestes, with Acrobatornis sister to the pair.
Has been merged into Margarornis by some authors, or thought by others to be closer to Premnoplex or Premnornis, but genetic data#R#R#R indicate that it is part of a group that also contains Thripophaga and Cranioleuca.
Sister to the Spartonoica–Pseudoseisura clade. Previously included in Asthenes, but genetic analysis#R shows such treatment to render Asthenes polyphyletic, thereby corroborating earlier suggestions#R#R.
Forms a clade with Pseudoseisura, the two being sister to Pseudasthenes#R.
Forms a clade with Spartonoica, the two being sister to Pseudasthenes#R.
Previously placed in Synallaxis; recent molecular data#R suggest sister relationship to Schoeniophylax; further phylogenetic study#R confirms this relationship, and indicates that these two are sister to Certhiaxis, and that the three together are sister to Synallaxis.
Incorporates Poecilurus, Siptornopsis and Gyalophylax, all of which have been found to be morphologically and genetically#R inseparable from Synallaxis. See also Mazaria (above).
Molecular data#R#R show this as sister-genus to Tyranneutes, the two being sister to all other piprid genera.
Despite its morphological distinctiveness, nested within typical piprid genera, as confirmed by genetic data#R#R.
Until recently, listed as Dixiphia; this name has now been shown to apply not to this manakin but rather to the tyrannid Arundinicola (see page 200), of which it is a junior objective synonym#R. Previously subsumed within Pipra, thereby rendering that genus non-monophyletic#R.
Previously included in Pipra, but phylogenetic studies#R#R#R show that this renders Pipra non-monophyletic.
Newly erected genus, its species formerly placed in Chloropipo, but found in genetic study#R to be sister to Lepidothrix.
Molecular data#R indicate that closest relatives include Cryptopipo and Lepidothrix. Formerly thought close to Xenopipo and sometimes merged with it, but vocal repertoire far less extensive.
Often merged with Pipra, but genetic data support its separation#R#R. Genus name was claimed to be preoccupied by an insect genus (of Thysanura: silverfish, firebrats and relatives) named by Menge, also in 1854, so replacement name Neolepidothrix was proposed#R; however, Menge’s original spelling was Lepidotrix, and in genus-group names these two are not homonyms, while in any case Bonaparte’s name appears to have priority#R.
Genetic study#R indicates this is sister-genus to Corapipo, with Ilicura sister to the two; another genetic study#R generally supports these findings, but could not confirm monophyly of Corapipo with regard to Masius.
Sister to Chiroxiphia, this relationship corroborated by genetic data#R#R.
Sister to Antilophia, this relationship corroborated by genetic data#R#R.
Species placed in this new genus were formerly included in Lipaugus, but morphology and DNA analysis indicate only remote relationship to latter; previous suggestion of placement in Lathria, but that name unavailable.
Sister to Snowornis#R. In past, sometimes included in Ampelion, but the two are only remotely related.
Sometimes accorded its own separate family, Rupicolidae, but sister relationship with Phoenicircus confirmed by genetic data#R#R#R.
Sometimes merged with Ampelion, but differs in skull structure and plumage. Recent genetic data#R confirm that the two form a clade with Phytotoma, Phibalura and Doliornis.
Formerly treated as a separate family of uncertain affinities, or even as subfamily of Tyrannidae; see Zaratornis (above).
Sometimes merged with Ampelion, but differs in bill structure and juvenile plumage. See also Zaratornis (above).
Recent phylogenetic study#R found this genus to be embedded within Cephalopterus; further study advised.
Incorporates Tijuca, which was found in recent genetic study#R to be embedded in Lipaugus.
Genetic data#R indicate closest affinities to Gymnoderus.
Genetic data#R indicate closest affinities to Conioptilon.
Varied assemblage of genera long considered taxonomically problematic, and hitherto scattered variously by different authors among families Cotingidae, Tyrannidae and Pipridae, with frequent separation of Oxyruncidae, sometimes a reduced form of Tityridae, and lately Onychorhynchidae; recently shown by several phylogenetic studies to form a monophyletic group#R#R#R#R. Family name Tityridae introduced in 1830, thus having priority for this assemblage over name Oxyruncidae, of Feb 1832.
Relationships long debated, and genus variously included in Cotingidae, Tyrannidae or Tityridae, or sometimes placed in separate family Oxyruncidae, either on its own#R#R or with Onychorhynchus, Myiobius and Terenotriccus#R; recent analyses generally suggest that it belongs in Tityridae, within which it may be closest to members of Onychorhynchinae#R.
Traditionally placed in Tyrannidae. Appears to form a clade with Terenotriccus and Myiobius; this clade is probably sister to Oxyruncus (see also above). Name misspelt in HBW.
Traditionally placed in Tyrannidae; see also Onychorhynchus (above). Sometimes included in Myiobius.
Traditionally placed in Tyrannidae; see also Onychorhynchus and Terenotriccus (above). Author has normally, but erroneously, been listed as Darwin (as in HBW)#R.
Traditionally placed in Cotingidae; see Tityra (below).
Formerly included, with Pachyramphus, in Cotingidae; both were subsequently transferred to Tyrannidae, but recent molecular analyses#R#R#R#R indicate that the two, together with Iodopleura and Xenopsaris, represent a monophyletic group distinct from both of those families.
Previously placed in Cotingidae and then Tyrannidae. Apparently closest to Pachyramphus, but maintained as separate genus on basis most notably of much smaller size, different tarsal scutellation, short pointed primary P9, absence of strong sexual dimorphism, and different nest type.
Name based on Ptilochlorus, a junior synonym of Laniisoma.
Traditionally placed in Pipridae, although long suspected to be out of place there. Appears to form a clade with Laniocera and Laniisoma, being sister to both.
Often placed in Cotingidae or Tyrannidae, but see Schiffornis (above).
Traditionally placed in Cotingidae, but see Schiffornis (above).
Highly speciose family, herein divided into nine subfamilies (with ten tribes); recent studies#R#R suggest that the first four listed (Platyrinchinae, Pipritinae, Tachurisinae, Pipromorphinae) are sister to rest of family, and may merit treatment as 1–4 separate families.
Traditionally placed in Cotingidae. DNA from old museum specimen (collected in 1820s) reveals this genus as being closest to Neopipo and Platyrinchus#R.
Previously placed in Pipridae, but subsequently shown to belong in Tyrannidae, on basis of morphology, nest structure#R and genetic data#R#R; see also Calyptura (above).
Some 15–20 emendations proposed (all unjustified), of which most frequently used include Platyrhynchus, Platyrhynchos and Platyrinchos.
Previously placed in Pipridae, but genetic data support its placement with Tyrannidae#R, or perhaps forming a separate, closely related family#R.
Sometimes considered a separate family; apparently closest to Pipritinae and Platyrinchinae#R#R. Name originally proposed in 2013 as “Tachurididae”#R, but the genus name comes from Guaraní rather than Latin and original spelling requires correction to “Tachurisidae”#R (here modified for subfamily rank).
Date sometimes given (tentatively) as 1835#R, but both possible sources of name were apparently issued in 1836#R.
Varied assemblage of genera, most of which have traditionally been grouped together, but detailed sequence now modified on basis of genetic findings#R#R#R. Type genus currently subsumed into Mionectes.
Suggested to be sister to Corythopis, based on cranial and syringeal morphology#R; this relationship is supported by later genetic data#R#R.
Close to Pogonotriccus (see below).
Previously merged with Phylloscartes, and close relationship suggested by genetic data#R and nest architecture#R.
Sometimes included in Poecilotriccus, and internal morphology agrees with this; but better treated as a separate genus, on basis of distinctive morphological features (e.g. crest, bill shape, wing and facial patterns, unusual comb-like feathers above eyes, ruff-like feathering of head and nape), as well as vocalizations.
Name based on Triccus, a junior synonym of Todirostrum, whereas Todirostrini is a junior synonym of Triccini#R.
Sometimes merged with Lophotriccus, despite lack of distinctive crown pattern.
Incorporates Snethlagea, Idioptilon, Microcochlearius, Euscarthmornis and Ceratotriccus, in recent times all most commonly used as subgenera. Moreover, genetic data suggest that, as currently defined, present genus is not monophyletic#R#R#R.
Recently erected subfamily#R, comprising genera Myiotriccus, Nephelomyias, Pyrrhomyias and Hirundinea.
Newly erected genus for three species traditionally placed in Myiophobus; extensive DNA-based study#R shows them to constitute a well-supported clade not closely related to other Myiophobus, instead forming a small independent lineage with Myiotriccus, Pyrrhomyias and Hirundinea.
Taxa formerly included in Tyranniscus, but, when that genus was divided into two groups, the type species (nigrocapillus) was one of three species transferred to Phyllomyias, thus requiring erection of present genus#R.
Probably polyphyletic as currently constituted; study needed.
Sister to Camptostoma, based on genetic data#R. Incorporates Microtriccus.
Sister to Ornithion, based on genetic data#R.
In many respects transitional between Phyllomyias and Myiopagis; anatomical evidence suggests closer relationship to latter.
Previously merged with Phylloscartes, but genetic data#R#R indicate that it is sister to Phyllomyias and Phaeomyias.
Probably polyphyletic, as presently constituted; objective phylogenetic analysis required, using both molecular and anatomical characters. Anatomical evidence suggests that P. fasciatus (and presumably P. weedeni), P. griseocapilla and P. griseiceps may be unrelated to others in genus, some or all of which might be better placed in a resurrected Tyranniscus (type of Phyllomyias is P. fasciatus brevirostris).
Recent mtDNA study nests Nesotriccus within Phaeomyias, suggesting the two should perhaps be merged#R.
Hypothesized to be close to Stigmatura on basis of cranial and syringeal characters, but genetic study#R found it to be an independent lineage.
As presently constituted, probably polyphyletic; study needed.
Long replaced by name Spizitornis, as present name was erroneously believed to be preoccupied.
Genetic data#R confirm close relationship with Culicivora. Previously listed under replacement name Habrura, but Polystictus is valid and has priority.
Often treated as incertae sedis because of unusual plumage and tail feathers, presence of only ten rectrices, and non-exaspidean tarsi; plumage, bill morphology, behaviour and habitat suggest probable close relationship to Pseudocolopteryx, and this is supported by some genetic data#R.
Monophyly of genus, as currently constituted, has been questioned, with proposal for first three species listed below being placed in a new genus, Holmbergphaga#R; if split accepted, however, name Ridgwayornis#R would have priority.
Previously subsumed into Anairetes, but recognition supported by recent genetic study#R.
Placed by early authors in Cotingidae or Formicariidae, on basis of tarsal scutes. Affinities within present family unclear; placed in or near Muscisaxicola by some, but coronal patch, long legs with aberrant scutellation, bare tibia, and wing and tail shapes support separation in monotypic genus; molecular data confirm distinctiveness, and place it in monotypic subfamily, being sister to pairing of Tyranninae and Fluvicolinae#R.
Along with Legatus and Ramphotrigon, appears to be basal to Tyranninae#R. In past, classified in Cotingidae.
Affinities uncertain, but see Attila (above). Previously linked with Myiozetetes on basis of syringeal morphology and fully enclosed globular nest, as well as piratical nesting behaviour; however, observations suggest that such behaviour and/or nest adoption may have evolved several times independently or be ancestral traits in the subfamily.
Affinities uncertain, but see Attila (above); previously thought to be allied to Tolmomyias and Rhynchocyclus.
Affinities uncertain. Currently considered closest to Ramphotrigon, and sometimes merged with it, but differs in syringeal characters.
Affinities uncertain; may be close to Myiozetetes, given numerous similarities in nesting behaviour. See also Philohydor (below).
Close to Pitangus, and perhaps sister to it#R; often subsumed therein, despite substantial differences in morphology and behaviour.
Previously associated with Fluvicolinae, mainly on basis of cranial and syringeal morphology#R; but long suspected to belong with kingbirds#R, and molecular evidence confirms a close relationship with Pitangus#R.
Long considered closely related to Myiozetetes on grounds of plumage; syringeal morphology and nest architecture suggest closer affinity to Megarynchus, and DNA evidence supports this#R.
Sister to Tyrannopsis and Megarynchus#R; long suggested to be closest to Conopias, largely on basis of similar hole-nesting tendencies.
See Tyrannus (below). No evidence for previously hypothesized relationship with Myiodynastes.
See Tyrannus (below). In past, variously placed in Myiozetetes or Conopias, but differs significantly in syringeal morphology and nest architecture. Further research required.
Long included in Empidonomus, owing to similarities in voice and behaviour; split as separate genus, based mainly on several uniquely derived differences in syringeal morphology. See also Tyrannus (below).
Based on molecular data#R#R, forms a group with Myiozetetes, Empidonomus and Griseotyrannus, and probably also Conopias and Phelpsia. Close relationship with Empidonomus and Griseotyrannus supported by conspicuous notching on inner webs of outer primaries in all three genera. As currently constituted, present genus may be polyphyletic#R; more complete study needed.
Placed by early authors in Cotingidae, with supposed close relationship to Laniocera and Lipaugus. Well-supported anatomical evidence, however, indicates that it is a tyrannid, having close affinities to Casiornis, Sirystes and Myiarchus; DNA studies#R#R support this grouping, and suggest that present genus and Casiornis are sisters.
Probably sister to Rhytipterna (see above). In past, placed in Cotingidae.
In past, placed in Cotingidae, but internal morphology (syrinx, nasal capsule) and nesting behaviour indicate that it is a tyrannid, and is allied to other members of Myiarchini (see Rhytipterna, above).
Phylogenetic study based on mtDNA#R found that, with exception of M. semirufus, this genus comprises two clades, one of predominantly Caribbean and Central and North American taxa, the other of South American taxa. See also Rhytipterna (above).
Affinities uncertain; further study required. Sometimes included in clade of Alectrurus (see page 200).
Apparently paraphyletic, with M. flavicans, M. phoenicomitra, M. roraimae and presumably M. inornatus probably closest to Ochthoeca, and requiring a new genus name#R; type species of present genus is M. fasciatus. Three previously included species already transferred to Nephelomyias (see page 170).
Has normally been included in Ochthoeca, but recent DNA data#R support its separation, placing it as sister to Colorhamphus; original split based on morphology of syrinx and nasal septum, backed up by details of plumage and nesting behaviour#R.
Sometimes merged with Ochthoeca, to which it appears morphologically closest, but see Silvicultrix (above); in past, sometimes thought to be related to Mecocerculus or Elaenia.
See Alectrurus (below); also Knipolegus (below).
Close to Fluvicola and sometimes merged with it, but anatomical and behavioural details suggest separate treatment more appropriate. See also Alectrurus (below).
See Alectrurus (below). Anatomical considerations indicate that closest relatives may be the somewhat similar Muscipipra and, perhaps, the very different Neoxolmis.
Relationships uncertain; anatomical studies suggest closest ally as Gubernetes (and perhaps Neoxolmis), a view supported by reanalysis#R of published data on general appearance, voice, behaviour, syringeal anatomy, and scant breeding information. See also Alectrurus (below).
Based on recent phylogenetic studies#R#R#R, forms a well-supported clade with Pyrocephalus, Fluvicola, Arundinicola, Gubernetes and perhaps Muscipipra (not included in analyses); Colonia might also belong here.
See Knipolegus (below); in one study, found to be nested within Knipolegus, which would thus be paraphyletic#R.
Together with Lessonia and Hymenops forms a well-supported clade#R#R which was previously also considered to include Pyrocephalus#R.
Appears to be closest to Muscisaxicola, and perhaps basal to an “austral and high Andean clade”, which also includes Cnemarchus, Polioxolmis, Xolmis, Agriornis, Neoxolmis and Myiotheretes#R#R. Has sometimes been grouped with Ochthoeca salvini (formerly separated as Tumbezia) and Myiozetetes on basis of plumage similarities, but nest type, egg coloration and syringeal morphology provide no obvious taxonomic clues.
See Satrapa (above). In past, sometimes merged into Myiotheretes or Xolmis.
See Satrapa (above). Formerly included in Cnemarchus or Xolmis, and sometimes grouped with Myiotheretes; syringeal and other morphological evidence supports separation as monospecific genus.
See Satrapa (above). Incorporates Pyrope and Heteroxolmis.
See Satrapa (above). Previously placed in Myiotheretes or Xolmis; syringeal morphology most similar to that of otherwise different Gubernetes and Muscipipra.
See Satrapa (above). Sometimes placed near Gubernetes and Muscipipra, on basis of anatomical and morphological characters. Has frequently been treated as incorporating Polioxolmis and Cnemarchus.
Probably sister to pairing of Cnemotriccus and Lathrotriccus#R. Has sometimes been merged into Ochthoeca, but differs notably in anatomy and morphology#R, as well as behaviour and habitat.
Close to Lathrotriccus#R, and has been considered its sister#R.
Probably sister to Cnemotriccus#R, and also close to Aphanotriccus#R. Formerly included in Empidonax.
Forms a clade with Sayornis, Empidonax and Contopus#R#R, as part of assemblage already recognized on anatomical grounds#R.
See Mitrephanes (above). Phylogenetic studies#R#R indicate that this genus contains four distinct clades, a result followed here.
Affinities uncertain, current placement provisional#R.
Traditionally grouped with Paradisaeidae, but now considered to belong among “basal oscines”, being sister to Climacteridae#R.
Previously merged into Climacteris, but differs in structure (e.g. bill shape, leg length, sole pads, skull, secondaries), egg coloration, plumage (juvenile characteristics, sexual dimorphism) and behaviour; generic separation corroborated by molecular evidence.
Forms a clade with Clytomyias and Chenorhamphus, based on DNA study#R.
On basis of genetic studies#R#R, sister to a group that includes Clytomyias and Chenorhamphus.
Sister to Malurus and Clytomyias, based on recent genetic study#R.
Recent analysis#R proposes division of species into five subgenera.
Internal sequence based mainly on findings of recent phylogenetic studies#R#R, with a few modifications#R#R.
Recent genetic analysis#R places this genus in a basal position, as sister to all other genera in the family.
Basal to a clade also containing Trichodere, Phylidonyris and Lichmera#R#R. In past, together with Sugomel, often subsumed into Certhionyx, but DNA data#R#R#R show these to represent three separate clades.
In past, often subsumed into Lichmera, or even Meliphaga.
Sister to Melithreptus, as confirmed by multilocus phylogenetic analysis#R.
Sister to Entomyzon, as confirmed by multilocus phylogenetic analysis#R.
Previously included in Lichenostomus, but DNA data#R#R show that such treatment renders that genus polyphyletic.
Appears to belong to a central Polynesian radiation that also includes Guadalcanaria, Meliphacator, Gymnomyza and Foulehaio#R. In past, sometimes lumped into Melidectes (see page 242), and/or linked with monotypic Acanthagenys (see page 238).
See Meliarchus (above). In past, variously placed in Meliphaga or Lichenostomus; sometimes considered close to Glycifohia (herein subsumed into Gliciphila).
See Meliarchus (above). Previously included in Xanthotis, and sometimes further subsumed into Meliphaga; alternatively placed in Foulehaio#R. Recent molecular analysis#R indicates that it is not closely related to Xanthotis or Foulehaio.
See Meliarchus (above). In past, suggested as being most closely related to Melidectes.
Forms a clade with Plectorhyncha, Grantiella, Melitograis and Philemon#R#R. In past, sometimes subsumed into Meliphaga.
Closely allied to morphologically dissimilar Grantiella, based on molecular studies; see also Xanthotis (above).
See Plectorhyncha (above) and Xanthotis (above). In past, sometimes subsumed into Conopophila.
Often included in Philemon, to which it is closely related; see also Xanthotis (above).
Forms a clade with Vosea and Myzomela#R#R; previously merged into latter. In past, together with Cissomela, often subsumed into Certhionyx, but DNA data#R#R#R show these to represent three separate clades.
Previously placed in Melidectes, but DNA data#R indicate that it is not closely related to that genus and is, instead, sister to Myzomela. See also Sugomel (above).
Forms a clade with Certhionyx, Prosthemadera, Anthornis and Pycnopygius, as confirmed by recent genetic data#R#R.
See Acanthorhynchus (above). In past, treated as including Cissomela and Sugomel, but DNA studies#R#R#R show that these represent three separate clades.
Sister to Anthornis, based on genetic data#R. See Acanthorhynchus (above).
Sister to Prosthemadera, based on genetic data#R. See also Acanthorhynchus (above).
See Ptiloprora (below). Type species recently found to be nested in midst of the two species thereto separated in Glycifohia, resulting in merging of Glycifohia into present genus#R. Previously subsumed into Phylidonyris#R. Spelling sometimes erroneously emended to Glyciphila.
See Ptiloprora (below). In past, sometimes placed in Timeliopsis (see page 234).
Forms a clade with Gliciphila and Glycichaera, as confirmed by recent genetic data#R#R.
Forms a clade with Ramsayornis and Conopophila#R#R; this clade is sister to another that includes Melipotes (see below).
Sister to Epthianura, as confirmed by genetic data#R; these two were previously placed in Acanthizidae or separated in their own family, Epthianuridae (as in HBW), but more recent DNA analyses indicate that they belong with the honeyeaters. See also Melipotes (below).
See Ashbyia (above) and Melipotes (below). Name often misspelt Ephthianura.
Close to Epthianura and Timeliopsis. See also Melipotes (below).
Formerly considered to be a bird-of-paradise (Paradisaeidae), but molecular analyses indicate that this is a honeyeater, closely related to Melipotes (which see, below).
Forms a clade with Ashbyia, Epthianura, Melilestes, Timeliopsis and Macgregoria#R#R; this clade is sister to another that includes Stresemannia (see above). Closely related to Macgregoria.
Relationships obscure; sometimes merged with Lichenostomus or Meliphaga. Genetic study required. See Meliphaga (below).
Previously included Microptilotis, but molecular analysis#R supports recognition of separate genera due to ancient divergence. These two form a clade perhaps also including Oreornis, which remains unsampled in molecular analyses.
Until recently, included in Meliphaga (see above).
Until recently included in Lichenostomus, but genetic data#R support its separation. Appears to form its own clade#R, being closest to those of Manorina (see below) and Meliphaga (see above).
Previously included in Lichenostomus, and then in “Caligavis subgroup”; but genetic data#R support treatment in a separate genus, which is sister to pairing of Acanthagenys and Anthochaera. See also Manorina (below).
See Manorina (below). In past, sometimes merged into Anthochaera.
See Manorina (below). Includes previously recognized genus Zanthomiza.
Previously treated as a subgenus within Lichenostomus, but molecular data#R support treatment as a full genus. Sister to Ptilotula. See also Manorina (below).
Sister to Gavicalis, both previously treated as subgenera within Lichenostomus. See also Manorina (below).
Sister to Caligavis#R#R. Previously included in Phylidonyris, but genetic study#R shows them not to be closely related. See also Manorina (below).
Sister to Purnella#R#R. Previously treated as a subgenus of Lichenostomus, but molecular data#R support treatment as a full genus. See also Manorina (below).
See Manorina (below). Previously included (mostly as subgenera) Nesoptilotis, Stomiopera, Bolemoreus, Gavicalis, Ptilotula and Caligavis, but this arrangement was shown to be polyphyletic#R#R.
Sister to Melidectes#R. These two belong to a clade that also includes Lichenostomus, Caligavis, Purnella, Ptilotula, Gavicalis, Anthochaera, Acanthagenys and Bolemoreus#R.
Sister to Manorina#R (which see, above). Includes Melionyx; previously considered to include Vosea (see page 226).
Name selected by First Reviser in preference over simultaneously published Oreoscopinae#R.
Sister to Oreoscopus, based on DNA data#R. Previously placed in Pachycephalidae, and was alternatively suggested to be close to Petroicidae.
See Pachycare (above). In past, sometimes merged into Crateroscelis (see page 248).
Incorporates Hylacola, following the findings of molecular study#R.
Rather surprisingly, found to be sister to Aphelocephala, based on genetic study#R. Previously merged into Sericornis.
Previously merged into Pomatostomus, but differs in behaviour, bill and plumage coloration, and nest type (pendent).
Previously included variously in Paridae, Timaliidae, Orthonychidae, Campephagidae, Sylviidae, Maluridae or Acanthizidae; in recent times, usually in Pachycephalidae. Several studies suggest it has no close relatives, and is best treated as a separate family, basal to core corvoids#R#R#R.
Relationships uncertain#R. May be sister to Neosittidae, but somewhat distantly related#R#R; traditionally placed in Pachycephalidae.
Present family-group name has priority over Daphoenosittidae, even though genus-group name Daphoenositta has priority over Neositta.
Previously placed in Pachycephalidae, where it was considered to include all species now relocated in Melanorectes (see page 262) and Pseudorectes (see page 270), as well as Ornorectes (Oreoicidae, see page 260). Recently shown to belong in present family, in which it is sister to Sphecotheres#R#R#R.
Original description included two different spellings, “Sphecotheres” and “Sphecotera”; former selected as valid by First Reviser#R.
Affinities long uncertain: traditionally placed in Dicaeidae, and at one stage suggested to be aberrant Pycnonotidae, while Oreocharis was initially thought to belong with Paridae; more recently, both genera included in Melanocharitidae. However, well differentiated from all of these families in external morphology and aspects of nidification, and genetic analyses also support treatment as a separate family, with closest allies variously suggested to be Oriolidae, Psophodidae or Vireonidae#R#R#R.
Three monospecific genera previously scattered within Pachycephalidae, where no clear links were agreed; now shown to be closely related to each other#R#R, but nearest relatives of the group much debated, with proposals including Oriolidae, Paramythiidae, Pachycephalidae, Rhagologidae, Campephagidae, Malaconotidae, Artamidae, Cinclosomatidae and Falcunculidae#R.
Sometimes placed close to Colluricincla, as it resembles C. harmonica in size and shape, and females of the two are similar to each other in plumage.
Taxonomic position historically uncertain, and in past typically placed in a giant Muscicapidae, close to Timaliidae; there, it was grouped in a dubious assemblage with species now widely scattered in Orthonychidae, Psophodidae, Ifritidae, Melampittidae and Eupetidae#R. Genetic studies suggest closest relatives may be Paramythiidae, Psophodidae or Falcunculidae#R#R.
Sister to Cinclosoma, based on phylogenetic study#R.
Sister to Ptilorrhoa, based on phylogenetic study#R.
In the past, normally merged with Pachycephalidae; relationships remain uncertain, and other possible allies variously suggested as Cinclosomatidae, Psophodidae or Eulacestomidae#R#R.
Previously placed in Pitohui (see page 254), but genetic studies#R#R#R indicate that it is sister to Coracornis and Pachycephala.
Internal sequence revised based on recent molecular findings#R#R#R but with additional modifications, notably due to partial disbanding of traditional expanded P. pectoralis (which see, page 268).
Previously included in Pitohui (see page 254). Sister to Colluricincla, as indicated by recent genetic analyses#R#R#R#R; these two sometimes awarded a separate family, Colluricinclidae.
See Pseudorectes (above) and Coracornis sanghirensis (page 262). Name Collyriocincla is an unjustified emendation, proposed separately by Sharpe and then Salvin.
Taxonomic position historically uncertain (see Cinclosomatidae, page 260). Genetic studies suggest closest relatives may be Paramythiidae or Vireonidae#R#R.
Sister to Psophodes, as confirmed by phylogenetic study#R; plumage patterns likewise suggest close relationship.
Internal arrangement heavily modified, based on recent genetic study#R, along with addition of Asian genera Pteruthius and Erpornis (see below).
Traditionally placed in Timaliidae, but genetic studies indicate that it is not closely related to that family#R, and belongs instead in Vireonidae#R.
Traditionally placed in Timaliidae, either in Yuhina (page 508) or occasionally in Stachyris (page 528), but not closely related to these groups, as confirmed by molecular evidence#R; recent work#R#R places this taxon in Vireonidae.
In past, occasionally placed in its own family, Cyclarhidae; within present family, sometimes awarded its own subfamily, Cyclarhinae.
Position relative to Vireolanius unclear, and latter may be more basal#R. Previously included Pachysylvia (page 276) and Tunchiornis (page 274), but recent work shows that arrangement to be polyphyletic#R.
Early offshoot within Vireonidae, along with Cyclarhis and Hylophilus (which see, above), as confirmed by recent molecular study#R; sometimes awarded its own subfamily, Vireolaniinae, or in past its own family, Vireolaniidae.
Until recently included in Hylophilus (see above).
Until recently included in Hylophilus (see above); one species imported from Vireo.
Incorporates Melodivireo, Lawrencia and Neochloe; one species imported from Hylophilus.
Sister to Ceblepyris, on basis of genetic data#R.
Previously included in Coracina, to which it is sister#R.
Often merged with Campephaga, but separated on basis of colourful plumage, facial wattles, and sexual plumage similarity.
Previously included in Coracina, but genetic data suggest it may be sister to Edolisoma and Lalage#R#R.
Previously included in Coracina, but genetic evidence#R indicates that separate treatment is appropriate.
Previously included in Coracina, but genetic data#R indicate that separation is more appropriate. Older name Celebesia is preoccupied by an insect genus.
Previously included in Coracina, but genetic data#R indicate that it merits separate status.
Formerly included in Pachycephalidae, and indeed long placed within Pachycephala; genetic studies#R#R#R reveal that the single species belongs elsewhere, being close to Artamidae and meriting its own monospecific family#R.
Incorporates Cracticidae, whose species now constitute subfamilies Peltopsinae and Cracticinae.
Genetic data#R do not clarify relationships among species within present genus.
Previously included in Cracticus, but DNA evidence suggests it is most closely related to Gymnorhina, to which it is sister#R.
Sister to Melloria. Often included in Cracticus, a treatment largely supported by recent molecular study#R, but substantial differences in morphology, ecology and behaviour#R suggest recognition of separate genus.
Traditionally placed in Monarchidae but amply demonstrated by phylogenetic studies to belong instead within a well-supported clade of African and Australasian families, among which it may be closest to Artamidae, Rhagologidae or Aegithinidae#R.
Previously placed in Sylviidae, but recent genetic studies situate it within present family#R#R.
In past, variously placed in Pycnonotidae, Oriolidae,Turdidae or Sturnidae. Recent molecular research indicates that it belongs in present family.
In past, sometimes separated in monotypic Hyposittidae, or placed in Paridae, but morphological and anatomical features, and genetic data#R, indicate that inclusion in present family is more appropriate.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, but genetic data#R place it clearly in present family.
Previously placed in Platysteiridae, but several modern studies#R#R#R indicate that it belongs in present family.
May be closest to Schetba and Euryceros, based on recent molecular analyses#R#R.
In past, sometimes separated in monotypic Eurycerotidae; recent molecular analyses#R#R indicate that it may be closest to Schetba and Vanga.
May be closest to Oriolia, Falculea and Artamella, based on recent molecular analyses#R#R.
See Falculea (below) and Xenopirostris (above).
Based on recent molecular analyses#R#R sister to Artamella, the two being closest to Oriolia. See also Xenopirostris (above).
Sometimes subsumed into Leptopterus, but recent molecular analyses indicate that it is closest to Falculea (see above).
Relationships long uncertain, and in past tentatively associated with Laniidae, Malaconotidae, Vangidae (correctly!), Campephagidae or even Pycnonotidae, and accorded its own family, Prionopidae, in HBW; but genetic data#R call for its placement within Vangidae.
Formerly placed in Campephagidae; molecular data#R confirm it as closest to Tephrodornis.
Formerly placed in Campephagidae; closest to Hemipus (see above).
Sometimes treated as a subgenus of Bias; in recent decades, these two have normally been placed in Platysteiridae.
Previously placed in Monarchidae, and has also been linked with Malaconotidae; but more recent genetic studies#R#R place it with Tephrodornis and relatives in present family.
Previously placed in Malaconotidae and has also been linked to Muscicapidae and Prionopidae (latter now in Vangidae); comment in HBW (11: 164) that it may belong in present family now supported by genetic data#R#R, which place it close to Batis.
Traditionally placed alongside Chloropsis and Irena, all three most typically being lumped in Irenidae; genetic work has shown it to be closely related to Malaconotidae and allies#R#R.
Affinities uncertain; in past, variously linked to Laniidae, Sturnidae, Vangidae, Timaliidae or others. DNA analysis indicated close affiliation with genera Cracticus, Gymnorhina and Strepera in Artamidae. More recent DNA-sequencing studies#R suggest closest to Malaconotidae; close relationship with both Malaconotidae and Aegithinidae supported by subsequent genetic studies#R#R. Spelling Pityriaseidae (as in HBW) is erroneous#R.
Previously included in Laniidae#R.
Previously included in Tchagra, but recent genetic investigation#R suggests separate generic treatment. Antichromus is a junior synonym.
Has variously been placed in Laniidae, Prionopidae (now in Vangidae) and Muscicapidae; nest and several plumage features very like those of Batis (Platysteiridae), as are white nape and back, fluffy rump and white wingstripe. Duet-singing and some aspects of breeding behaviour, however, are typical of present family.
Genus sometimes subsumed into Malaconotus or Telophorus.
Previously subsumed into Telophorus; molecular study#R indicates that the two are sisters.
Previously placed in Dicruridae; phylogenetic studies#R#R show it to be sister to Lamprolia and that both belong in Rhipiduridae; the two may merit a family of their own#R.
Previously placed in Monarchidae, but found to be sister to Chaetorhynchus (see above).
Incorporates Chaptia, Bhringa, Dicrachibia, Dissemuroides, Dissemurus and Dissemurulus.
Relationships unclear, and in past has variously been placed in Orthonychidae, Eupetidae, Maluridae, Monarchidae or others, or in greatly expanded Muscicapidae. Now considered sufficiently distinct to be accorded its own family#R, perhaps closest to Monarchidae, Laniidae, Corvidae, Paradisaeidae and Corcoracidae#R#R#R#R.
Formerly placed in Corcoracidae, or later in Dicruridae, or alternatively accorded its own family, Grallinidae; now included in Monarchidae, based on genetic data#R#R and further supported by details of skull morphology.
Previously included in Monarcha, but genetic studies#R#R indicate that such treatment renders Monarcha polyphyletic, so separate genera required#R.
Previously included in Monarcha, but genetic studies#R#R indicate that such treatment renders Monarcha polyphyletic, so separate genera required#R.
Recent phylogenetic analysis#R suggests that this genus, as presently constituted, is paraphyletic; further work needed.
Morphology, vocalizations and behaviour suggest close affinities with both Hypothymis and Terpsiphone.
Traditionally placed in Corvidae, but morphological study#R and molecular analyses#R#R#R indicate that it is distinct from that family; perhaps sister to Laniidae#R#R, and has been included therein in one recent work#R.
Previously subsumed into Corvinella on basis mainly of similarities in morphology (e.g. long tail), vocal communication patterns, and social behaviour, but differences appear too great for the two to be combined#R.
In past, linked with Prionops (see page 298), often in Malaconotidae, but several subsequent studies place it within Laniidae#R.
Affinities uncertain; probably one of the most primitive genera of the family, but has received remarkably little study.
Has sometimes been included in Cissa (see below).
Often expanded to encompass Urocissa, but present genus has distinctive appearance.
DNA-sequencing indicates that this genus and Cyanopica form unique clades, separate from other corvids; significance of this requires further research, but it suggests that Perisoreus is not very closely related to Garrulus.
Traditionally placed in present family, but shows several atypical features (notably its sucking-lice, Mallophaga) and anatomical peculiarities (mobility of bare facial skin, structure of palate); occasionally separated in monotypic Zavattariornithidae, or more recently included in Sturnidae, but DNA-sequencing analysis supports inclusion in present family. Similar in plumage colour and pattern to Nucifraga columbiana and Podoces panderi, but taxonomic significance doubtful.
Long, graduated tail, sociable habits and piping calls suggest, as with Zavattariornis, an affinity with Sturnidae, but DNA-sequencing supports inclusion in present family. Very unusual among passerine genera in having ten (instead of twelve) tail feathers.
Includes Uroleuca, Psilorhinus, Calocitta, Xanthoura and Cissilopha, as recommended in phylogenetic study#R.
Formerly placed in variety of families, especially Orthonychidae, Eupetidae or Paradisaeidae; differs from last in having downy nestlings and in not feeding them by regurgitation. Recently found to be more distinct and placed in its own family#R, apparently closest to Corcoracidae and Paradisaeidae#R#R.
Recently erected genus#R, differing from Melampitta mainly in body form, plumage and habits.
Previously placed with Grallina in a family Grallinidae, but now established as a separate family, closest to Paradisaeidae and Melampittidae#R#R #R. Family-group name Struthideidae has priority over Corcoracidae, but latter has been formally protected, following application#R to ICZN; in past, both Corcorax and Struthidea were at times considered to constitute monospecific families, so both names were simultaneously in use.
Previously subsumed into Manucodia; separation supported by recent genetic work#R. “Phonygama” is an incorrect subsequent spelling#R.
Sometimes included in Astrapia#R, but differs in bright yellow forehead wattles and coloured gape wattles, long narrow bill, and all-black plumage in both sexes; displays and calls also distinct.
Closely allied to Paradisaea, and commonly subsumed into it#R, but distinct in plumage, vocal characters and display behaviour; genetic data#R indicate that the two genera are sisters.
Has often been spelt Paradisea, but present spelling formally conserved by ICZN.
Creadion sometimes used for this genus but now formally suppressed, and present name conserved#R.
Traditionally placed in Meliphagidae, but recent DNA studies assign it to a family of its own, close to Callaeidae and Cnemophilidae#R#R, and/or perhaps Petroicidae.
Previously dispersed in other families, berrypeckers in Dicaeidae and longbills in Meliphagidae, but united in a separate family on basis of genetic studies#R#R#R; closest relatives appear to be Cnemophilidae, Notiomystidae and Callaeidae#R#R, perhaps also Petroicidae and Picathartidae#R.
Closely related to Melanocharis and sometimes merged with it.
Sometimes subsumed into Toxorhamphus, despite the fact that it pre-dates it by almost 40 years.
Previously included in Paradisaeidae, but genetic studies place this ancient group as a separate family, probably closest to Callaeidae and Notiomystidae or to Petroicidae and Picathartidae#R.
In past, linked with Corvidae or Timaliidae, but genetic studies place it closest to Eupetidae and Chaetopidae#R#R.
DNA studies support close relationship with African families Chaetopidae and Picathartidae#R#R.
In past, normally linked with Timaliidae, but genetic studies place it closest to Eupetidae and Picathartidae#R#R#R#R.
Genetic data#R indicate close association with Petroica.
Previously included in Microeca, but resurrected based on findings of recent molecular analysis#R.
Previously included in Microeca, but resurrected based on findings of recent molecular analysis#R.
Newly erected, following findings of recent phylogenetic study#R#R. Previously placed in Eopsaltria.
Previously included in Poecilodryas. In past, sometimes misspelt Genneadryas.
Previously included in Eopsaltria, but genetic data#R suggest monotypic genus is appropriate.
Formerly subsumed into Petroica, but differs in plumage details and body postures, as well as juvenile plumage, nest and eggs, and skull characters.
Has been placed in Poecilodryas, or more recently in Eopsaltria or Peneothello, but placement in its own genus seems best option. Closest to Peneothello#R.
In past, variously placed with Muscicapidae, Monarchidae or Platysteiridae, but differs in several respects from all of these. Molecular data#R indicate that it represents a very old oscine lineage with no known near relatives; perhaps closest to Stenostiridae, Paridae and Remizidae#R#R.
Members previously scattered variously across Rhipiduridae, Monarchidae and Muscicapidae and sometimes Sylviidae, but recent genetic studies#R#R#R unite them in a separate family, perhaps closest to Paridae and Remizidae#R#R.
Previously placed in Sylviidae on basis of plumage and behaviour (but nestling very different), or sometimes included in Monarchidae (but differs in voice, mouth colour, lack of eyering, shape of carpometacarpus); in HBW included in Muscicapidae.
Previously placed in Rhipidura (see page 314), but genetic data#R#R indicate that it is sister to Stenostira.
Previously placed in Muscicapidae, and some DNA studies suggested it belonged in Petroicidae, but later genetic studies#R#R ally it to members of present family.
Previously placed in Monarchidae, with first three species below sometimes in Trochocercus; but is closest to Culicicapa, and inclusion in present family supported by genetic data#R.
On basis of molecular data, either sister to Paridae#R or (as followed here) basal within it#R. Previously placed in Regulidae or, more recently, Remizidae; behavioural and other information supports treatment in Remizidae or present family.
Sometimes merged into Parus, but genetic data confirm both distinctiveness and close relationship to Melanochlora#R.
Genetic data indicate close relationship to Sylviparus#R.
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below), whence moved to Periparus, but now separated in present genus based on recent genetic data#R#R; internal relationships require further research.
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below).
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below).
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below).
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below), from which all but S. semilarvatus were removed to Poecile; S. semilarvatus recently found#R to be sister to S. varius (with owstoni, olivaceus and castaneoventris), leading to their separation in present genus.
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below).
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, below).
Until recently placed in Corvidae, often in the ground-jay genus Podoces; but osteological, morphological and vocal characters indicate that it belongs in present family, and a comprehensive genetic review of the Paridae recovered Pseudopodoces as sister to the Parus major complex#R.
Until recently, greatly expanded to encompass all members of family other than monospecific Sylviparus and Melanochlora (with monospecific Cephalopyrus then in Remizidae and Pseudopodoces in Corvidae), thus including Pardaliparus, Periparus, Baeolophus, Lophophanes, Sittiparus, Poecile, Cyanistes, Machlolophus and Melaniparus#R. Last two listed were also retained within present genus until Pseudopodoces was found to be sister to Parus major complex, thus requiring their generic separation too#R.
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, above). M. nuchalis was previously considered part of the P. major complex, but a multi-locus genetic study indicates that its closest relatives are current congeners; closer genetic proximity of Pseudopodoces to P. major requires resurrection of Machlolophus for this clade of four species#R.
Previously part of a much broader genus Parus (which see, above). These Afrotropical species form a monophyletic group, separated from Parus by interposition of Pseudopodoces, and thus require a separate genus#R.
Often treated as a single species, sometimes as three (by lumping R. coronatus and R. consobrinus)#R or two, with R. pendulinus also considered conspecific with R. macronyx. Treatment as four distinct species based mainly on structural differences, as well as plumage and habitat; further research required.
In past, at times variously placed with Paridae, with Coereba (previously Coerebidae, now Thraupidae, see page 858), or with Polioptilidae; but genetic data confirm its position in Remizidae#R, where it shares several features with other family members, in particular nest details, vocalizations, bill shape and incomplete post-juvenile moult.
Recent molecular phylogeny of this family#R—the most comprehensive attempted to date—has recommended novel arrangements for several species and genera, including the resurrection of a number of abandoned genus-group names.
Traditionally included in Ammomanes, but genetics place it much closer to Certhilauda and Chersomanes#R.
Often included in Mirafra, but structure, plumage (including sexual dimorphism) and migratory behaviour all differ; molecular data confirm closer relationship to Ramphocoris and Ammomanes#R.
Spelling often incorrectly emended to Rhamphocorys.
Recently split from Calandrella, based on genetic data#R. Emendation to Alaudula unjustified.
Previously considered very closely related to Alauda, or even merged into it, but genetic data reveal that Spizocorys and Lullula are sisters#R.
Considerable genetic evidence indicates that this taxon is not, as previously thought, closely related to Paradoxornis (now in Sylviidae), but instead is probably sister to Alaudidae#R#R#R#R#R.
Systematic position long debated; traditionally classified within a broad family Laniidae based on similarities in coloration and bill morphology, or placed with Malaconotidae (formerly part of Laniidae) or with Pycnonotidae on morphological grounds. Analyses of feather proteins and early studies of DNA-DNA hybridization both favoured placement in Pycnonotidae, but genus unique in several morphological and other features (including nest structure). Recent DNA studies place it in a separate family, probably close to Alaudidae and Panuridae#R#R#R#R.
Recently delineated family, comprising Macrosphenus, Sphenoeacus, Melocichla, Achaetops, Sylvietta and Cryptillas#R; in addition, Graueria tentatively included here, but its affinities are still uncertain, as no molecular data published.
Previously placed in a broad Sylviidae (see page 498), or more recently in Acrocephalidae. Numerous forms described in “Sylviella”, an unjustified emendation of present genus name.
Previously placed in Bradypterus, but differs from African members of that genus with respect to plumage, structure, behaviour and song, while genetic data also support its present treatment#R.
In past, often placed in Chaetops (see page 372) on basis of similarities in osteology and habitat, but distinct in behaviour and voice; previously placed in Timaliidae, but molecular evidence places it close to Sphenoeacus within present family#R#R. Further research required.
Closely related to Melocichla and Achaetops, as now confirmed by genetic analyses#R#R.
Sometimes merged with Sphenoeacus; closely related to that genus and Achaetops, as confirmed by genetic data#R.
Affinities uncertain; no molecular data published. Often considered close to Macrosphenus, but bill shorter and stronger, a feature that has caused some to place it in Timaliidae; barred underparts and build suggest possible close relationship with Calamonastes (Cisticolidae, see page 416). Further research required.
Previously placed in a much-expanded Sylviidae, but transferred to Cisticolidae based on genetic evidence#R.
Shows structural similarities to Camaroptera and Calamonastes, but although these two belong to the same broad clade (Eremomelinae) within the family, present genus is more basal within this lineage#R.
Previously included in Prinia, but differs in calls, behaviour, plumage and nest structure; genetic data reveal closer relationship to Drymocichla#R.
Sometimes placed in Prinia, but genetically rather distant from it#R.
Sometimes included in Orthotomus, but has ten (not twelve) rectrices; genetically much closer to Apalis and allies#R.
Previously placed in Apalis, where it was considered closely related to A. thoracica, but it is genetically quite distinct#R#R.
Previously included in Prinia, but genetic evidence suggests it is sister to Phragmacia#R.
To date, sampling insufficiently dense#R#R to provide a genetic perspective on many long-standing issues of specific and subspecific taxonomy. Many relationships postulated here remain to be tested by molecular data, and further examples of polyphyly may emerge once more extensive sampling has been possible#R#R.
Sometimes placed in Apalis; has been linked with Acrocephalidae, but genetic data situate it in Eremomelinae#R.
Affinities recently clarified by molecular study#R; previously placed variously in Camaroptera (but has only ten rectrices) or Artisornis.
Recently shown to belong in present family rather than with Timaliidae, although precise position remains to be determined#R#R.
Often placed in Bathmocercus, which it superficially resembles, but genetic evidence suggests that it is instead basal to Cisticola. Closely related to Euryptila#R.
Previously linked to Bradypterus (Locustellidae, see page 442); also speculated to be closely allied to Calamonastes, despite lack of a tailored nest and differences in nostril structure.
In past, at times included in Cisticola due to structural similarities, in spite of remarkably long bill, reddish eyering, and behavioural similarities to Camaroptera and Prinia; genetic evidence places it in a separate subclade from Cisticola#R.
Often included in Prinia, but genetic evidence indicates that its closest relatives include Hypergerus and Eminia#R.
Previously linked to Timaliidae, but genetic evidence places it within the present family, where it is sister to Eminia#R#R#R#R.
Sister to Hypergerus, and sometimes merged into it.
Internal relationships poorly known; much genetic study needed. Part of a clade that also includes Scepomycter, Euryptila, Incana, Malcorus, Hypergerus, Eminia and Bathmocercus#R#R.
Now includes several species previously placed in other genera#R; more extensive genetic studies still required.
Precise position within Cisticolidae recently clarified#R.
Previously included in a broad Sylviidae; genetic data place this group as a family apart, perhaps closest to Pnoepygidae, with Locustellidae, Donacobiidae and Bernieridae as other near relatives#R#R#R.
Molecular data suggest basal position within Acrocephalidae#R#R.
In past, same genus (including same two taxa, as a single species) was classified alongside “Calamocichla group” (see Acrocephalus, below); subsequently included in Chloropeta along with two species of Iduna (which see, below). Recent molecular work has confirmed Calamonastides as representing an early radiation within Acrocephalidae, meriting separate generic treatment#R.
Previously placed in Acrocephalus, but genetic data support separation in monospecific genus, which is probably sister to Iduna#R or Calamonastides#R. Present name has priority over Phragmaticola#R.
Comprises four species previously placed in Hippolais and two from Chloropeta, shown by genetic studies#R to be each other’s closest relatives; also close to Arundinax. Name Iduna (type species caligata) has priority over Chloropeta (type species natalensis).
Based on genetic studies#R#R#R#R, comprises at least four subgenera, containing species as listed below: Titiza (name has priority over Calamodus), streaked forms, plus unstreaked A. bistrigiceps (species 18–22); Notiocichla, small unstreaked forms (species 23–29); Calamocichla, African/Malagasy forms (species 30–36); and Acrocephalus, large forms, including all Australian and Polynesian species, plus three from Eurasia (species 37–54). Further genetic work required in Wallacea and Australasia; sequence of taxa in Polynesia has been comprehensively reorganized following molecular analysis.
Traditionally considered part of an expanded Timaliidae, but a recent molecular study recovered the genus Pnoepyga outwith the latter and well within the Sylvioidea radiation, although its precise relatives remain obscure#R.
Recently erected family#R#R; constituents previously placed in a broad family Sylviidae, typically in subfamilies Megalurinae and Acrocephalinae, as well as a few species previously listed in a broad version of Timaliidae. Internal structure, including addition and removal of various taxa, has steadily been clarified in recent years by series of genetic studies#R#R#R#R; several elements yet to be tested genetically, so some further changes expected. Previously listed as Megaluridae, but (as currently constituted) name Locustellidae has priority#R.
Asian taxa removed from Bradypterus and included here, based on evidence from molecular studies#R.
Previously considered to comprise up to eight species; all but one since transferred to Cincloramphus, Poodytes or, in one case, Locustella#R.
Asian species formerly placed in Bradypterus now transferred to Locustella, to avoid paraphyly, so present grouping is now exclusively Afrotropical#R#R.
Currently includes Australasian species formerly placed in Megalurus.
Includes taxa previously treated in Megalurus and Eremiornis#R; arrangement provisional and requires confirmation via more complete taxon sampling.
Placement in present family to some extent tentative, as is case with Amphilais, Buettikoferella, Chaetornis, Elaphrornis, Malia and Robsonius; many of these taxa remain to be screened genetically.
All taxa previously placed in Napothera, within a broader Timaliidae, but preliminary genetic analysis places these species in present family#R.
Sole species was frequently thought to belong in family Mimidae, based on large size, morphology (long tail, short rounded wings, heavy feet and legs), open cup-nest, and rambunctious and extroverted behaviour; in contrast, its well-developed social structure (duetting vocalizations and mutual display) is very reminiscent of some troglodytids, notably in genus Campylorhynchus, in addition to which anatomical studies argued in favour of placement in Troglodytidae; DNA studies, however, have demonstrated that it is an aberrant, Neotropical isolate “sylvioid”, that requires its own family#R#R#R#R.
Recently delineated family of exclusively Malagasy provenance, comprising taxa traditionally classified as Timaliidae, Sylviidae or Pycnonotidae#R#R#R#R; constituent species exhibit considerable variety of bill shapes, wing and tail proportions, and tarsus lengths, linked to their favoured habitats and diets. Prior to formal introduction of family-group name with current spelling#R, alternative spelling “Bernieriidae” was also used informally.
Often considered congeneric with Xanthomixis, but genetic data refute this.
Previously merged into Bernieria, but DNA sequence data indicate that the species thus involved do not form a monophyletic group.
Only recently confirmed to belong in this family#R, as previously suspected.
Often considered to include Eurochelidon; these two are basal to all other genera in the family, on evidence of molecular study#R.
Often merged into Pseudochelidon (see above), but differs in bill size and shape (broader and flatter), eye size and colour, and foot size, and also in toe proportions.
In past, often merged into Hirundo, but DNA studies support recognition of separate genera.
Has often been merged into Hirundo, but DNA studies support use of separate genera.
Has often been considered to include any or all of Petrochelidon, Cecropis and Ptyonoprogne.
Often merged into Hirundo, but DNA studies indicate that the two are sisters.
Previously subsumed within Riparia, but differs in its large size, bill and nostril shapes, loral bristles, squarer tail and more solitary lifestyle. Phylogenetic study#R indicates that closest relatives are the also monospecific Phedina and Phedinopsis; some have suggested that all three be considered congeneric (in Phedina)#R.
See Neophedina (above) and Phedinopsis (below).
Previously considered sister to Phedina, and indeed sometimes placed in that genus; vocalizations, however, apparently more similar to those of Neophedina than to those of Phedina#R; moreover, DNA data#R indicate deep genetic divergence separating all three, whence present treatment in three monospecific genera. In past, present species occasionally treated in Riparia.
Sometimes merged with Stelgidopteryx, but lacks serrated wing edge; genetic data#R strongly support their treatment as separate genera.
Recent phylogeny of family based on genetic data#R involves considerable alteration of hitherto accepted generic limits of “Neotropical core martins” (Pygochelidon to Orochelidon in current list). Among these changes is transfer to present genus of A. pileata, the type species of previously speciose genus Notiochelidon; as Atticora has priority, name Notiochelidon now passes into its synonymy.
Resurrected in order to accommodate new genetic findings#R.
Based on molecular data#R, forms a group with Calyptocichla and Andropadus (sensu stricto) that is basal to African greenbuls. Formerly submerged within Andropadus, and earlier in Pycnonotus.
Distinctive form, apparently closest to Stelgidillas#R (see above).
Previously considered to include all species currently placed in Stelgidillas, Arizelocichla and Eurillas, but separated on basis of DNA#R. Formerly submerged within Pycnonotus.
Skeletal and molecular studies confirm species belongs within present family, although, contrary to earlier suggestions, not as a basal branch#R.
Previously included in Chlorocichla, but DNA data place it closest to Ixonotus and Thescelocichla#R.
Sister to Baeopogon, based on DNA findings#R.
Apparently sister to a group formed by Atimastillas, Ixonotus, Thescelocichla, Baeopogon and Chlorocichla#R; previously included in Andropadus, which itself was earlier merged with Pycnonotus.
Apparently sister to the group formed by Arizelocichla (which see, above) and its allies#R; previously included in Andropadus, which itself was earlier merged with Pycnonotus.
Previously considered close to Alophoixus, and the two were often merged; but recent molecular evidence#R indicates relationship remote, despite close similarity in appearance.
Often subsumed within Phyllastrephus; separated primarily on bill shape.
Often placed in an expanded Hypsipetes, but unique features favour separation in monospecific genus.
Often merged into African Criniger, but molecular study#R indicates that African and Asian members of this family are only distantly related. Phylogeographical study#R reveals apparent presence of a ring species complex in Indomalayan region, and this is supported by analytical study#R.
In past, has at various times incorporated some or all of Tricholestes, Iole, Hemixos, Ixos and Cerasophila.
As currently constituted probably polyphyletic; in-depth analysis of morphology, voice, behaviour and genetics required to redefine its limits. In past, included numerous other genera.
Previously subsumed into Pycnonotus. Sometimes placed in Microtarsus.
Previously subsumed into Pycnonotus. Sometimes included in Microtarsus.
Previously subsumed into Pycnonotus. Sometimes placed in Microtarsus.
Sometimes included in Hypsipetes or in Iole, but unique morphology and nest structure support treatment as monotypic genus.
Formerly included in a broad Sylviidae. Recent review#R indicates that previous internal arrangement, with all taxa of present family split between Seicercus and Phylloscopus, was paraphyletic. As a result some authors have split Phylloscopus into several smaller genera, with some movement of taxa from Phylloscopus to Seicercus, but accuracy of this debatable on present knowledge. One of these versions#R involves groups containing species as listed below: Rhadina (species 1–3); Abrornis (species 4–13); Phylloscopus (species 14–28); and Seicercus (species 29–78). Another version#R divides family into nine genera. More cautious alternative involves merging Seicercus into Phylloscopus; adopted herein, pending results of a comprehensive study currently in progress#R.
Previously scattered about within a broad version of Sylviidae. Recent genetic studies show these taxa to form a well-defined group that is probably closest to Aegithalidae and Phylloscopidae#R#R#R#R. The three subfamilies are sometimes recognized as three separate families.
Previously placed in Monarchidae, but shown not to be closely related and to belong instead within present assemblage#R#R.
Previously placed in Cisticolidae, where was sometimes even merged into Prinia.
Previously included all species now placed in Horornis.
Genetic data#R suggest that this genus should perhaps be submerged into Urosphena.
Previously grouped alongside Seicercus (now merged into Phylloscopus, see page 482).
Previously placed in Orthotomus (see page 428), but recent studies clearly show that it belongs here#R.
Often absorbed in Abroscopus, but is highly distinctive by virtue of relatively large, flattened bill and exceptionally long rictal bristles.
Previously included in Cettia, but separated on basis of genetic studies#R.
Affinities uncertain; in past, often included in Nectariniidae, mainly on account of certain anatomical features, and sometimes in Paridae or Ploceidae. Recent genetic study#R places present genus and Pholidornis together in a separate family, Hyliidae; further study needed.
See Hylia (above). In past, variously placed with Nectariniidae, Estrildidae, Sylviidae, Paridae, Remizidae or Meliphagidae.
Recent genetic study#R strongly supports inclusion in present family, and also nests it within Aegithalos, to which behaviour and vocalizations very similar.
Previously considered to incorporate numerous other taxa, including some or all current members of Acrocephalidae, Locustellidae, Phylloscopidae, Scotocercidae, Macrosphenidae, Bernieridae and sometimes Cisticolidae. Earlier, this assemblage was grouped with Timaliidae (sensu lato) and Turdidae in an outsize Muscicapidae.
Includes Horizorhinus, Pseudoalcippe and Lioptilus (all previously placed in Timaliidae); sometimes further subdivided, with recognition of e.g. Curruca. Some recent studies support division into three distinct clades#R; within this framework retesting and revised analysis have led to new sequence for species 19–30 below#R. In view of uncertainties, herein a broad genus seems more appropriate meantime, pending more complete results.
Previously placed in Timaliidae. Genetic study#R shows it to be sister to Sylvia, but other possible close relatives not sampled; further analyses, with wider sampling, may well indicate that it should be subsumed into Sylvia, which it closely resembles vocally and in size and shape.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, but genetic data#R situate it in present family.
Previously included in Timaliidae; sometimes placed in Chrysomma (below), but genetic data#R suggest it requires its own separate genus.
Previously included in Timaliidae, where commonly merged with Alcippe; genetic data#R place it in present family, probably closest to Moupinia and Chrysomma.
Previously placed in Timaliidae but genetic data confirm its position in present assemblage#R.
Previously treated in Timaliidae; in past, placed near Cisticola (see page 418) and allies, but subsequently found to be close to Sylvia#R.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, where commonly merged into Alcippe.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, but genetic data#R#R#R indicate that it belongs in present family.
Previously considered to include Psittiparus, Cholornis, Neosuthora, Suthora, Chleuasicus and Sinosuthora (all sometimes still lumped#R), and, together with Conostoma and Panurus (see page 406), was treated in a separate family, Paradoxornithidae; split into present genera was based mainly on morphology and voice#R.
Previously subsumed into Paradoxornis (see above).
See Paradoxornis (above). Original description included two different spellings (Conostoma, Conostama), as well as three of species name (aemodius, oemodius, omodius); both elements determined by ICZN Principle of First Reviser#R. Present genus name was claimed to be preoccupied by name of an insect (Diptera) genus, with replacement name Enendrozdovoma proposed; but the insect name appears to have been an error for Conosoma, and spelling Conostoma Rudolphi, 1801, is not in use#R.
See Paradoxornis (above). Older name Heteromorpha is preoccupied by an insect (Lepidoptera) name#R#R.
See Paradoxornis (page 506). Sometimes merged into Suthora.
See Paradoxornis (page 506). Sometimes included in Suthora.
Genetic studies#R#R#R#R#R have led to considerable upheaval, involving internal rearrangement (including merging of Speirops and Woodfordia into Zosterops, and of Lophozosterops and Oculocincta into Heleia); addition of Yuhina, Zosterornis, Sterrhoptilus and Dasycrotapha from Timaliidae; and removal of previously included Madanga (to Motacillidae) and Hypocryptadius (to Passeridae). However, DNA of several relevant taxa remains unscreened so further revision is likely, for example of relationship between present family and now much-reduced Timaliidae#R#R.
Previously placed in Timaliidae. As currently constituted, genus is polyphyletic, comprising at least three groups all of which might be recognized at generic level and at least one of which is unnamed, with Y. diademata sister to all Zosteropidae, and one of the Yuhina clades sister to the remainder of Zosteropidae#R#R#R.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, where was sometimes merged into Stachyris; moved to present family based on dense molecular sampling#R#R#R. See comment under Z. whiteheadi.
Incorporates Lophozosterops and Oculocincta, as well as one species previously in Zosterops.
In past, placed in Meliphagidae#R; DNA analyses indicate that present genus and also Apalopteron belong in present family#R#R.
In past, variously placed in Pycnonotidae, Timaliidae, Sylviidae and until recently Meliphagidae. DNA-DNA hybridization and field studies indicate placement in present family, close to Cleptornis (see above).
Rather atypical member of the family. Has sometimes been merged into Rukia.
Could perhaps be subsumed within Zosterops, but molecular data are contradictory#R#R.
Previously placed in Timaliidae, where sometimes treated within Stachyris; reclassified as a result of DNA studies#R#R.
Traditionally placed in Timaliidae, where variously treated in Stachyris or more recently Sterrhoptilus, but molecular evidence situates it in present family#R#R; morphological differences from Sterrhoptilus support separation of present genus, but denser molecular screening needed to confirm or refute this#R.
Internal structure much clarified by recent genetic studies#R#R, which also show that Speirops and Woodfordia do not represent monophyletic assemblages and are best subsumed within present genus; one species previously included herein (wallacei) is better transferred to Heleia.
May be closely related to Zosterops (perhaps closest to Z. cinereus), differing only in colour (complete absence of green and yellow pigments) and size (somewhat larger).
Previously considered part of an outsize Muscicapidae, where was treated as a very varied assemblage including most members of current Pellorneidae, Leiotrichidae and Pnoepygidae, as well as some current members of numerous other families (e.g. Sylviidae, Zosteropidae, Vireonidae, Vangidae, Macrosphenidae, Cisticolidae, Locustellidae, Bernieridae, etc.). Recent genetic work has clarified true relations of many of these taxa#R#R#R; thus, Macronus, Pomatorhinus and Stachyris, as traditionally circumscribed, were all polyphyletic, so several rearrangements have become necessary. Nevertheless, many of the species currently retained (based on traditional usage) remain to be tested genetically, so composition and internal systematics of this family are still liable to refinement.
Includes Xiphirhynchus, based on genetic evidence; in contrast, several species have been separated into Erythrogenys#R#R. Recent DNA study suggests three separate clades, and that many additional species might be recognized under a phylogenetic species concept#R.
Previously included in Pomatorhinus (see above). Recently introduced name Megapomatorhinus is a synonym of Erythrogenys, although latter name was coined accidentally#R.
Includes distinctive species previously placed in Sphenocichla, based on genetic re-evaluation#R.
Reinstated to resolve paraphyly within an expanded Macronus#R.
Original description included two different spellings of name (Macronus, Macronous); current name determined by First Reviser#R.
Formerly merged into Stachyris; some constituents latterly separated into Stachyridopsis, as in HBW, but recent molecular study#R moves several other species from Stachyris into same grouping, including type species (C. erythropterum) of Cyanoderma, which, being the older name, has precedence.
Newly accepted family, based on results of numerous molecular studies#R#R#R#R, and essentially comprising taxa previously buried in a broad Timaliidae (see above), with addition of Graminicola and Laticilla from Sylviidae and Cisticolidae, respectively#R.
Traditionally merged into Alcippe (now in Leiotrichidae), while some species have been included in Pseudominla; however, molecular data require resurrection of present genus, and place type species of Pseudominla herein#R#R.
Previously included in Prinia (Cisticolidae), but vocally distinct and recently shown to be genetically far removed from that family; however, closest relatives of Laticilla are still unknown#R.
Placement uncertain. Often merged with Trichastoma or Malacocincla, but differs in its longer tarsus, shorter toes, rounded (rather than oval) nostril, thinner bill, proportionately longer tail, and very different song. Recent DNA study recovered Leonardina as being closely related to two “Rhinomyias” flycatchers (Muscicapidae) from Borneo#R, but this extraordinary finding demands confirmation#R. Original genus name Leonardia, but that name was preoccupied.
Commonly merged into Napothera in past, but split on basis of molecular data; same study recovered type species of Malacocincla (M. abbotti) within Turdinus clade#R.
Previously#R included all members of Turdinus (above), as well as Robsonius (now Locustellidae, see page 446); removed on molecular evidence#R#R.
Two species (R. naungmungensis and R. danjoui) sometimes separated in Jabouilleia; alternatively, all five species might be subsumed within Napothera.
Previously placed within a much-expanded Sylviidae, but transferred to present family based on genetic data, which found that Graminicola is sister to Malacocincla abbotti#R.
Recently split from a broader Timaliidae. To date, traditionally recognized genera Cutia, Kupeornis, Phyllanthus, Turdoides, Garrulax, Babax (now in Garrulax), Heterophasia, Leiothrix, Minla, Liocichla and Actinodura have been recovered as members of a clade separate from those now placed in Timaliidae or Pellorneidae; however, Garrulax, Actinodura, Minla, Heterophasia and Turdoides, as typically circumscribed, have also been discovered to be polyphyletic. As a result, genetic data available to date#R#R#R#R#R (many species have not been screened) can be interpreted in various ways, permitting for a smaller number of larger genera, or many more genera characterized by fewer species, so listing presented here is provisional and dependent on additional molecular data for most of the as yet untested taxa. Family name has been spelt in variety of different ways; above is the original spelling, which is correctly formed and so must be used#R.
Tentatively separated from Turdoides#R; genetic screening of at least some component taxa required.
Sometimes included in a broader Turdoides, but here returned to monospecific genus owing to spiny shafts to its breast feathers and in consideration of its distinctive voice.
Resurrected for two species based on fact that C. gularis is paraphyletic with respect to other species previously in Turdoides; C. longirostris is unscreened#R.
Close to Phyllanthus, differing in smaller and weaker bill with relatively broader base (less laterally compressed), more slit-like nostrils and more slender feet, but both genera could be subsumed within Turdoides based on molecular data#R.
Genera Leucodioptron, Stactocichla, Ianthocincla, Dryonastes, Rhinocichla, Melanocichla and Babax all provisionally sunk within a re-expanded Garrulax, but denser taxon sampling for DNA might necessitate restoration of at least some of these, given morphological and sometimes vocal or other differences shown by representative taxa#R.
Traditionally subsumed into Garrulax; in turn, genus Strophocincla (recognized in HBW) is provisionally included in this grouping.
Includes previously recognized genus Malacias.
Sometimes subdivided, with recognition of Mesia for L. argentauris (with laurinae).
Often included in Heterophasia, and sometimes in Minla, but differs markedly in structure, behaviour and vocalizations.
Formerly treated within Actinodura, but split on basis of molecular data#R#R; name Ixos recommended for this grouping is a junior subjective synonym of Sibia#R.
Often merged into Minla (which has priority by one month), but markedly different vocally and there is no good evidence for a close relationship; afforded monospecific genus following genetic study#R.
Commonly merged into Minla, but separated in monospecific genus following recent DNA work#R.
Formerly listed under Crocias, but Laniellus has priority#R; neither species has been tested genetically, so placement in Leiotrichidae provisional.
Order of species is primarily based on a recent, well-resolved and largely comprehensive molecular phylogeny#R.
Usually treated in either a separate family (as in HBW) or in a subfamily of Sittidae (as here); genetic analysis places it as sister to Sitta, but further corroboration required#R.
Has been treated as separate family, Salpornithidae, mainly due to lack of stiffened tail feathers; alternatively, as in HBW, considered a subfamily of Certhiidae (above), and this may yet be better option, given finding that Salpornis and Certhia are sister taxa, albeit with low support#R. Recent molecular phylogeny places it provisionally closer to Sitta than to Certhia#R. Earlier research using biometrics, song structure and cytochrome b sequences supported treatment as a separate family with closest, but still loose, relationship to Tichodromidae.
Closely related to Troglodytidae, based on several independent genetic datasets#R#R#R#R.
Genetic data indicate a close relationship to Polioptilidae, followed by Certhiidae and Sittidae#R#R#R, and support monophyly of present family, once Donacobius is removed; traditional linear sequence of species and genera, with Campylorhynchus listed first, now rearranged to reflect discovered phylogenetic relationships#R#R#R#R#R.
Previously far more speciose; genetic data#R show that, as traditionally constituted, present genus was polyphyletic, leading to division of all South American taxa into three further genera (below): Pheugopedius (some of which also range well into Middle America); Thryophilus (also well represented in Middle America); and recently described Cantorchilus. The two species remaining in present genus appear closely allied to Thryomanes#R.
Previously included in Thryothorus (see above).
Previously included in Thryothorus (see above).
Previously included in Thryothorus (see above); present genus recently erected following wide-ranging genetic study of traditional Thryothorus#R.
Variously placed in Troglodytes, Henicorhina or Thryothorus but, in absence of convincing argument, it is currently retained in its own monospecific genus.
Often included in Sturnidae, but DNA data#R show it to be a clade basal to Sturnidae and Mimidae and requiring treatment as a separate family.
Genetic data#R indicate that this genus is sister to all other genera in the family.
Often subsumed into Sturnus; alternatively into Sturnia.
Often subsumed into Sturnus; alternatively, on occasion, into Sturnia.
Often subsumed into Sturnus; genus Temenuchus (type species S. pagodarum) sometimes used#R, but Sturnia (type species S. sinensis) has priority#R.
Formerly merged with Sturnus; sometimes name Poliopsar used, but is preoccupied#R.
Often subsumed into Cinnyricinclus; sometimes into Poeoptera.
Formerly subsumed into Saroglossa, but genetic data#R support separate treatment.
Often subsumed into Lamprotornis, but genetic data#R support separate treatment.
Often subsumed into Lamprotornis, but genetic data#R support separate treatment.
A Philippine endemic group, previously considered closest to Sittidae, Certhiidae and Climacteridae, and traditionally placed in a separate family, Rhabdornithidae; however, revealed by genetic data#R#R to be sister to a larger and considerably more recent radiation of S Asian and Pacific-island starlings and mynas.
Resurrected genus for single species previously placed in Basilornis but found to be paraphyletic with latter#R.
Includes Mainatus, a junior synonym; this is the basis of the family-group name Mainatinae Lesson, 1831, which has priority over Graculinae G. R. Gray, 1841#R.
Name Aplornis is a few days older than Aplonis, but has been virtually unused, and now formally suppressed#R.
In past, name Galeoscoptes was often used, but present name is the older one. Sometimes incorporates Melanoptila.
Previously synonymized with Margarops, to which closely related, but genetic data#R support treatment as a separate taxon.
Formerly included in an outsize Muscicapidae. Genetic studies show present family to be sister to a more narrowly defined Muscicapidae#R#R#R#R; in line with this proximity, many genera traditionally grouped herein have recently been transferred to Muscicapidae, although some placements remain provisional.
Taxonomic position unclear. Highly distinctive; placement in its own family, Grandalidae, has been proposed.
Genetic data indicate that this genus is more closely related to African genera Neocossyphus and Stizorhina than to other New World thrushes (except perhaps Sialia#R).
Sister to Zoothera, based on genetic study#R, and sometimes merged into it. In past, sometimes placed in Timaliidae, as certain morphological and plumage features suggest affinities to genus Garrulax; other characteristics, however, such as juvenile plumage, terrestrial foraging behaviour and posture, are typically turdine.
Often merged into Zoothera but, apart from underwing pattern, plumage very different.
Has been included in Myadestes, but very different both vocally and in plumage.
Often included in Zoothera, but plumage very different, apart from underwing pattern.
Monotypic genus previously merged into Catharus, but genetic data#R#R indicate that it is closest to Ridgwayia.
In past, placed in Oriolidae and later in Campephagidae, but biomolecular and anatomical analyses situate it in present family, closely related to Cochoa.
Previously included in Zoothera, but phylogenetic study#R supports resurrection of present genus for Afro-Asian species. Present genus name (1835, delayed probably until early 1836) has been awarded priority over Geocichla (Apr 1836) by First Revisers#R; the two are separately proposed genus-group names, with different type species.
Frequently merged into Turdus, but found to be a basal lineage of Turdus thrushes, and sister to Psophocichla #R#R.
Formerly submerged into Turdus, but recognition supported by genetic data#R#R. May be sister to Otocichla, both being basal in relation to Turdus.
Main subject of several important recent studies#R#R#R from which the sometimes surprising sequence of species derives. Currently includes Platycichla, Cichlherminia, Nesocichla and Mimocichla, among others.
Systematic position unclear; further study needed, particularly with genetics. Balance of evidence, e.g. voice, singing behaviour, tail-raising habit, flushing behaviour and distinct juvenile plumage, favours treatment within present family.
In past, traditionally treated as an outsize family that also included expanded versions of Sylviidae, Timaliidae and Turdidae; these three were subsequently split off as three separate families, but still in much expanded form as compared to their current treatment. Since publication of HBW, limits of all these families have been dramatically rewritten due to a barrage of occasionally contradictory molecular data. Within present family problems remain, particularly due to incomplete taxon sampling, but near-complete screening to species level has now been attempted for at least a handful of genera (notably Oenanthe and Saxicola), and large elements of consensus have emerged, among them the recognition of four principal lineages, here treated as subfamilies. Most notable development involves transfer of many genera from Turdidae to present family, including Alethe, Cichladusa, Heteroxenicus, Brachypteryx, Heinrichia, Myophonus, Monticola, Thamnolaea, Myrmecocichla, Pogonocichla, Swynnertonia, Stiphrornis, Sheppardia, Cossypha, Xenocopsychus, Irania, Luscinia, Erithacus, Tarsiger, Cercotrichas, Copsychus, Phoenicurus, Saxicola and Oenanthe. Genetic sampling has also revealed extensive paraphyly, with the result that many species have switched genera. Some genera have disappeared completely into synonymy (e.g. Erythropygia), and others have shrunk to just one or two species (e.g. Luscinia), while a few have become substantially larger (e.g. Cercotrichas, Oenanthe).
All members traditionally treated in Turdidae, where often placed in Saxicolini.
Present basal position in Muscicapidae was proven via molecular methods#R.
Several genetic studies#R#R have confirmed that traditionally recognized genus Cercotrichas (or Erythropygia) is not monophyletic, but precise arrangement of species, their allocation to different genera and priority of names clarified only via complete sampling at species level; separating C. podobe as sole member of Cercotrichas (as in HBW) is untenable despite very different plumage. A separate genus, Salsolicola, also has been proposed for T. coryphoeus alone#R, and this species differs in basic egg colour (blue, as opposed to white) and song, and nestlings hatch with down feathers (rather than naked), but this arrangement likewise is not supported by molecular studies.