Toward resolving deep neoaves phylogeny : data, signal enhancement, and priors

We report three developments toward resolving the challenge of the apparent basal polytomy of neoavian birds. First, we describe improved conditional down-weighting techniques to reduce noise relative to signal for deeper divergences and find increased agreement between data sets. Second, we present formulae for calculating the probabilities of finding predefined groupings in the optimal tree. Finally, we report a significant increase in data: nine new mitochondrial (mt) genomes (the dollarbird, New Zealand kingfisher, great potoo, Australian owlet-nightjar, white-tailed trogon, barn owl, a roadrunner [a ground cuckoo], New Zealand long-tailed cuckoo, and the peach-faced lovebird) and together they provide data for each of the six main groups of Neoaves proposed by Cracraft J (2001). We use his six main groups of modern birds as priors for evaluation of results. These include passerines, cuckoos, parrots, and three other groups termed “WoodKing” (woodpeckers/rollers/kingfishers), “SCA” (owls/potoos/owlet-nightjars/hummingbirds/swifts), and “Conglomerati.” In general, the support is highly significant with just two exceptions, the owls move from the “SCA” group to the raptors, particularly accipitrids (buzzards/eagles) and the osprey, and the shorebirds may be an independent group from the rest of the “Conglomerati”. Molecular dating mt genomes support a major diversification of at least 12 neoavian lineages in the Late Cretaceous. Our results form a basis for further testing with both nuclear-coding sequences and rare genomic changes.

The presence of ultrasonic harmonics in the calls of the rifleman (Acanthisitta chloris)

Ultrasonic vocalisations (frequencies > 20 kHz) have been extensively studied in the context of echolocation by bats and other mammals (Sales & Pye 1974; Wilson & Hare 2004). Ultrasonic calls have also been recorded from birds, including the blue-throated hummingbird ( Lampornis clemenciae ) (Pytte et al. 2004), where it was first thought that individuals made use of high pitch calls to avoid masking by background noise in a visually obscured environment. Similarly, city-dwelling great tits ( Parus major ) use song with a higher minimum frequency (although not ultrasonic) compared to woodland birds to communicate with conspecifics to avoid the predominantly low-frequency background noise in the city (Slabbekorn & Peet 2003). The theory that birds use ultrasound to avoid noise masking was discarded when it was discovered that there was no corresponding auditory brainstem response (i.e. sensory perception) to the ultrasonic calls in the hummingbirds producing those calls.