Taxonomy and phylogeny of reed warblers (genusAcrocephalus) based on mtDNA sequences and morphology

Leisler, Bernd; Heidrich, Petra; Schulze‐Hagen, Karl

doi:10.1007/bf01651381

Cited by 102 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sibley and Ahlquist, 1990;Leisler et al, 1997;Helbig and Seibold, 1999;Beresford et al, 2005;Alström et al, 2006;Johansson et al, 2008a;Fregin et al, 2009Fregin et al, , 2012. The three genera Acrocephalus, Hippolais and Chloropeta have been split into several genera and/or subgenera, and there has been much disagreement regarding the classification of these taxa, especially Acrocephalus (Grant and Mackworth-Praed, 1941;Wolters, 1982;Watson et al, 1986;Sibley and Monroe, 1990;Dickinson, 2003;Haffer, 1991;Leisler et al, 1997;Helbig and Seibold, 1999). Leisler et al (1997) and Helbig and Seibold (1999) came to nearly identical conclusions based on analyses of cytochrome b sequence data.…”

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The three genera Acrocephalus, Hippolais and Chloropeta have been split into several genera and/or subgenera, and there has been much disagreement regarding the classification of these taxa, especially Acrocephalus (Grant and Mackworth-Praed, 1941;Wolters, 1982;Watson et al, 1986;Sibley and Monroe, 1990;Dickinson, 2003;Haffer, 1991;Leisler et al, 1997;Helbig and Seibold, 1999). Leisler et al (1997) and Helbig and Seibold (1999) came to nearly identical conclusions based on analyses of cytochrome b sequence data. Neither of them found the genera Acrocephalus and Hippolais to be monophyletic.…”

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neither of them found the genera Acrocephalus and Hippolais to be monophyletic. Leisler et al (1997) discussed the option of dividing these into a number of genera, and Helbig and Seibold (1999) proposed a classification into a number of subgenera. Helbig and Seibold (1999) investigated only one species of Chloropeta, C. gracilirostris, which was shown to belong in the clade with Acrocephalus and Hippolais, albeit in an unresolved position; Leisler et al 1997 did not study any Chloropeta.…”

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A review of the recent advances in the systematics of the avian superfamily Sylvioidea

Alström¹,

Olsson²,

Lei³

2013

Chinese Birds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The systematics of the avian superfamily Sylvioidea are reviewed, focusing on studies of relationships among families and within genera, more superficially on taxonomic studies at the species level. For the families Bernieridae and Phylloscopidae, new analyses based on already published sequence data are presented. Our understanding of relationships has been vastly improved in recent years due to a large number of molecular studies. However, the relationships among the different families remain largely obscured, probably mainly as a result of rapid divergence of the different primary lineages (families). Also, species level taxonomy has been much improved in recent years due to a large number of studies applying molecular markers and/or vocalizations and other life-history data. It seems likely that the number of species will continue to increase, as new groups are being studied with modern integrative methods.

show abstract

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Acrocephalidaementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review of the recent advances in the systematics of the avian superfamily Sylvioidea

Alström¹,

Olsson²,

Lei³

2013

Chinese Birds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this purpose, we created a composite phylogeny by using information from Sibley and Ahlquist (1990), which were combined with resolutions from other sources (Sheldon et al 1992;Seibold et al 1993;Suhonen et al 1994;Blondel et al 1996;Badyaev 1997;Leisler et al 1997;Cibois and Pasquet 1999;Møller et al 2001). We applied branch lengths from Sibley and Ahlquist (1990) for higher taxonomic levels.…”

Section: Phylogenetic and Taxonomic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untested assumptions about within-species sample size and missing data in interspecific studies

Garamszegi

Møller

2012

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phylogenetic comparative studies rely on speciesspecific data that often contain missing values and/or differ in sample size among species. These phenomena may violate statistical assumptions about the non-random variance component in sampling effort. A major reason why this assumption is often not fulfilled is because the probability of being sampled (i.e., being captured or observed) may depend on species-specific characteristics. Here, we test this assumption by using information on within-species sample sizes and missing data from five independent comparative datasets of European birds. First, we show that the two estimates of data availability (missing values and withinspecies sample size) are positively correlated and are associated with research effort in general (the number of papers published). Second, we demonstrate biologically meaningful relationships between data availability and phenotypic traits. For example, population size, risk-taking, and habitat specialization independently predicted within-species sample size. The key determinants of missing data were population size and distribution range. However, data availability was not structured by phylogenetic relationships. These results indicate that the accuracy of sampling is repeatable and distributed non-randomly among species, as several species-specific attributes determined the probability of observation. Therefore, data availability seems to be a speciesspecific trait that can be shaped by ecology, life history, and behavior. Such relationships raise issues about non-random sampling, which requires attention in comparative studies.

show abstract

“…Mathematical analysis shows that only the smallest stable learning biases need to evolve (Kirby et al, 2007;Smith, 2011;Thompson et al, 2012) because once a learning bias is in place cultural evolution will tend to amplify the effect of the bias, therefore masking the distinction between strong and weak biases, and thus 1 For example, whereas the Black-browed Reed Warbler (Acrocephalus bistrigiceps) mimics 2-5 species, the closely related Marsh Warbler (Acrocephalus palustris) mimics more than 100 (Hamao and Eda-Fujiwara, 2004). Nevertheless their cytochrome b (mtDNA) distance is only 10-11% (Leisler et al, 1997) whereas that between humans and chimpanzees is 15-16% (Castresana, 2001). eliminating any selective advantage of a stronger bias. If only small learning biases can evolve, it may be that these are too small to detect experimentally.…”

Section: Constraints On Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Components of the Language-Ready Brain

Boeckx¹,

Benítez‐Burraco²

2016

Frontiers Research Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taxonomy and phylogeny of reed warblers (genusAcrocephalus) based on mtDNA sequences and morphology

Cited by 102 publications

References 61 publications

A review of the recent advances in the systematics of the avian superfamily Sylvioidea

A review of the recent advances in the systematics of the avian superfamily Sylvioidea

Untested assumptions about within-species sample size and missing data in interspecific studies

Components of the Language-Ready Brain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About