Differentiation processes in treecreepers (Aves: Certhia): phylogeny, vocalisations, morphometrics

Evolutionary processes within the bird genus Certhia (treecreepers) are investigated and taxonomic uncertainties clarified. The original seven species of the genus have Holarctic distribution, are uniform morphologically and hence difficult to distinguish. I employed four methodological approaches. 1. Molecular phylogeny using the mitochondrial cytochrome-b gene largely established relationships and revealed two cryptic species. 2. Call and song recordings from all species and many subspecies were evaluated sonagraphically. The nine phylospecies outlined in Part 1 were clearly delimited from one another by time and frequency parameters. They comprise a monophyletic group of "motif singers" and a purely southeast Asian group of "trill singers". Song-character differences were generally consistent with molecular phylogeny (strong phylogenetic signals). 3. Central European Certhia familiaris in the field responded territorially to playback of verses of allopatric "motif singer" taxa, but usually more weakly than to their own subsequently presented songs. No song characters were unambiguously recognised as species-specific. 4. Standard body dimensions of nearly 2000 museum specimens characterise species and subspecies biometrically and reveal geographic trends. Lengths of bill and hind claw proved important parameters to explain the treecreeper lifestyle (climbing and feeding on tree trunks). In the Himalayas (highest species density) tail dimensions are also significant.

Bird count in Mastbos forest (Breda, Netherlands) in the years 1950 to 1981

Notes from Henrik de Nie: The project started as a phenological study in cooperation with the (Dutch) meteorological institute (KNMI) to register the time of arrival of Fitis and Tjiftaf. During 1951 to 1969 he went every day to the wood (except 1966, in this year his wife died). Thereafter he went no more daily, but because he knew the wood very well and he was free to choice the day on which he did a survey, therefore he choose days with relatively good weather. He did not observe very common bird species, maybe because they are dependent on nest boxes and he did not want to be dependent on the management of the nest box-people (in fact I forgot precisely his arguments, and now I cannot ask him this): Common Starling; Eurasian Tree Sparrow (not common); Great Tit; Eurasian Blue Tit Pieter mentioned 14 species that scored many zero values or only one observation: Stock Dove; Common Cuckoo; Lesser Spotted Woodpecker; Eurasian Golden Oriole; Eurasian Nuthatch; Short-toed Treecreeper; Common Nightingale; Marsh Warbler; Lesser Whitethroat; Goldcrest; Common Firecrest (after 1970 he had difficulties in hearing these two species); Spotted Flycatcher; Eurasian Bullfinch; Black Woodpecker He also mentioned species that he found much fewer as: European Greenfinch; European Pied Flycatcher; Long-eared Owl; Red Crossbill; Sedge Warbler; Icterine Warbler; Eurasian Woodcock; Eurasian Siskin; European Green Woodpecker; Great Spotted Woodpecker; Eurasian Hobby; Western Barn Owl; Woodlark; Common Wood Pigeon; Little Owl; European Crested Tit; Hawfinch. But for these species I think that observations are strongly dependent on the number of visits to the wood. Also here, many zeros and few 1 x during the whole series of visits.