Multiple Origins of the Ciconiiformes

Olson, Storrs L.

doi:10.2307/1520951

Cited by 36 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(iv) Taking into account the range of accessory material development, its ultrastructure, and possibly its composition, pelecaniform birds (including the Phaethontidae), S. umbretta, B. rex, and ardeiform birds compose one large group when compared with a broad range of avian eggshell data. This conclusion is in accordance with Olson's (1979) "loosely interrelated" group, though the Ciconiidae is replaced here by the Ardeidae.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Eggshell structure in the Shoebill and pelecaniform birds: comparison with Hamerkop, herons, ibises, and storks

Mikhailov¹

1995

Can. J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scanning electron microscope investigation of eggshell structure supports earlier beliefs that the pelecaniform family assemblage is a natural group. All families of pelecaniform birds except the Phaethontidae show complete similarity in the structure of both the crystallized eggshell and the accessory (amorphous) material (cuticle and cover) located in the outer surface of the shell.Comparisons with other avian taxa (93 families of non-passeriform birds) show that in terms of eggshell structure, Scopus umbretta is an "advanced" ardeid and Balaeniceps rex a rather unusual pelecaniform.All these birds should form one large group with the Ardeidae and clearly distinguished from the Ciconiidae. The results of this investigation imply that, ultimately, the deposition of microglobular material in the cover of avian eggshell is subject to phylogenetic constraints rather than having an adaptive (ecological) cause.RCsumC : L'examen de la structure de la coquille des oeufs au microscope Clectronique a permis de rkaffirmer que l'ensemble des familles de pClCcaniformes forme un groupe naturel. Chez toutes les familles de pClCcaniformes, 2i l'exception des Phaethontidae, la structure de la coquille cristalliske de l'oeuf et celle des structures accessoires amorphes (cuticule, revktement) 2i la surface externe de la coquille sont parfaitement semblables. Des comparaisons avec d'autres taxons (93 familles d'oiseaux non passCriformes) ont dCmontrC que la coquille de l'oeuf de Scopus en fait un ardCidC "avancC" et que Balaeniceps est un pClCcaniforme plut8t inusitC. Tous ces oiseaux devraient constituer un seul grand groupe avec les Ardeidae et un groupe totalement distinct des Ciconiidae. Les rksultats de cette Ctude ddmontrent que ce sont finalement des contraintes phylogCnCtiques plut8t que des causes Ccologiques (adaptations) qui dkterminent la formation des substances microglobulaires 2i la surface de la coquille de l'oeuf chez les oiseaux. [Traduit par la RCdaction]

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Eggshell structure in the Shoebill and pelecaniform birds: comparison with Hamerkop, herons, ibises, and storks

Mikhailov¹

1995

Can. J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cottam (1957) did not clearly state to which pelecaniform taxon she considered Balaeniceps to be most closely related, but indicated that it should be placed "possibly near the Pelecanidae". On the basis of a study of the middle ear region Saiff (1978) also concluded that the shoebill was more closely related to pelecaniform than to ciconiiform birds, and Olson (1979) noted that "it appears possible that the Balaenicipitidae, Scopidae and Ciconiidae may represent a more or less natural assemblage having affinities with the Pelecaniformes". However, Feduccia (1977) thought that the Balaenicipitidae were the sister taxon of the Ciconiidae because both taxa shared a similar derived morphology of the columella (ear ossicle).…”

Section: Scopus the Idea Of A Closer Affinity Betweenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Die phylogenetischen Beziehungen des Schuhschnabels (Balaeniceps rex)

Mayr

2003

J Ornithol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe phylogenetic affinities between the shoebill (Balaenicipitidae) and pelecaniform and ciconiiform birds are analysed. A cladistic analysis of 54 anatomical characters resulted in monophyly of the taxon (Scopidae + (Balaenicipitidae + Steganopodes (sensu Cracraft 1985))) and showed both Ciconiiformes and Pelecaniformes to be polyphyletic. Derived characters which support the resulting phylogeny are discussed. Monophyly of the taxon (Scopidae + (Balaenicipitidae + Steganopodes)) is better supported by morphological evidence than monophyly of the taxon (Procellariiformes + (Phaethontidae + Steganopodes)) which was established by Cracrafl (1985). The shared derived characters of Scopidae, Balaenicipitidae and Steganopodes are furthermore less easily explained by convergent evolution than by the few characters which support monophyly of the taxon (Phaethontidae + Steganopodes). The Phaethontidae share derived characters with the Procellariiformes, which might support a sister group relationship between the two taxa.Keywords: Phylogeny, Balaenicipitidae, Scopidae, Pelecanifonnes, Ciconiiformes, Procellariiformes, osteology. Zusammenfassung Die phylogenetischen Beziehungen des Schuhschnabels (Balaeniceps rex)Die phylogenetischen Beziehungen zwischen dem Schuhschnabel (Balaenicipitidae) und pelecaniformen und ciconiiformen V6geln werden untersucht. Eine kladistische Analyse yon 54 anatomischen Merkmalen resultierte in Monophylie des Taxons (Scopidae + (Balaenicipitidae + Steganopodes (sensu Cracraft 1985))) und ergab, dass sowohl Ciconiiformes als auch Pelecaniformes polyphyletisch sind. Abgeleitete Merkmale, welche den resultierenden Stammbaum begrtinden, werden diskutiert. Monophylie des Taxons (Scopidae + (Balaenicipitidae + Steganopodes)) ist besser gesttitzt durch morphologische Merkmale, als die yon Cracraft (1985) begrtindete Monophylie des Taxons (Procellariiforrues + (Phaethontidae + Steganopodes)). Die gemeinsamen abgeleiteten Merkmale von Scopidae, Balaenicipitidae und Steganopodes lassen sich dartiber hinaus weniger leicht dutch Konvergenz erkl~en, als die wenigen Merkmale, welche Monophylie des Taxons (Phaethontidae + Steganopodes) begrtinden k6nnten. Die Phaethontidae teilen abgeleitete Merkmale mit den Procellariiformes, welche eine Schwestergmppenbeziehung zwischen beiden Taxa sttitzen k6nnten.U.S.

show abstract

“…The monophyly of storks with respect to the cathartids and ibises is supported by numerous morphological and behavioral features (Kahl, 1972d;Hancock et al, 1992), but the pattern of relationships among storks, ibises, and cathartids remains a subject of considerable debate (Sibley and Ahlquist, 1990;Griffiths, 1994;Seibold and Helbig, 1995). Storks and cathartids share morphological and behavioral traits, including a common pectoral musculature, an absence of intrinsic syringeal muscles, and the habit of defecating on the legs to dissipate body heat (Ligon, 1967;Olson, 1979). Storks and ibises traditionally have been considered close relatives based on similarities in behavior, nesting habits, and the pattern of feather tracts on the body (Sibley and Ahlquist, 1990), although Olson (1979) argues, based on osteological features, that storks and ibises are distantly related.…”

Section: Choice Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Storks and cathartids share morphological and behavioral traits, including a common pectoral musculature, an absence of intrinsic syringeal muscles, and the habit of defecating on the legs to dissipate body heat (Ligon, 1967;Olson, 1979). Storks and ibises traditionally have been considered close relatives based on similarities in behavior, nesting habits, and the pattern of feather tracts on the body (Sibley and Ahlquist, 1990), although Olson (1979) argues, based on osteological features, that storks and ibises are distantly related. Given the available evidence and conflicting opinions, I included representative(s) from both the cathartid and ibis/ spoonbill families as outgroups in both the sequencing and the DNA-DNA hybridization data sets.…”

Section: Choice Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogeny of the Avian Family Ciconiidae (Storks) Based on CytochromebSequences and DNA–DNA Hybridization Distances

Slikas

1997

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple Origins of the Ciconiiformes

Cited by 36 publications

References 10 publications

Eggshell structure in the Shoebill and pelecaniform birds: comparison with Hamerkop, herons, ibises, and storks

Eggshell structure in the Shoebill and pelecaniform birds: comparison with Hamerkop, herons, ibises, and storks

Die phylogenetischen Beziehungen des Schuhschnabels (Balaeniceps rex)

Phylogeny of the Avian Family Ciconiidae (Storks) Based on CytochromebSequences and DNA–DNA Hybridization Distances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About