Myology and Serology of the Avian Family Fringillidae: A Taxonomic StudyStallcup, William B.
Science
Myology and Serology of the Avian Family Fringillidae: A Taxonomic Study
Stallcup, William B.
Birds; Finches
Sushkin's studies (1924, 1925) of the structure of the bony and horny
palates have served as a basis for the division of the Fringillidae
into as many as five subfamilies (Hellmayr, 1938:v): Richmondeninae,
Geospizinae, Fringillinae, Carduelinae, and Emberizinae.
Beecher (1951b:280) points out that "the richmondenine finches arise
so uninterruptedly out of the tanagers that ornithologists have had
to draw the dividing line between the two groups arbitrarily." His
study of pattern of jaw-musculature substantiates this. He states
further that the cardueline finches arise without disjunction
from the tanagers. He suggests, therefore, that the two groups of
"tanager-finches" be made subfamilies of the Thraupidae and that a
third subfamily be maintained for the more typical tanagers. He states
that the emberizine finches are of different origin, arising from the
wood warblers (1953:307). Beecher (1951a:431; 1953:309) includes the
Dickcissel, _Spiza americana_, in the Family Icteridae, chiefly on the
basis of jaw muscle-pattern and the horny palate.
Tordoff (1954:10-11) presents evidence that the occurrence of
palato-maxillary bones in nine-primaried birds indicates relationship
among the forms possessing them. He points out that all fringillids
except the Carduelinae possess palato-maxillaries that are either free
or more or less fused to the prepalatine bar. He points out also that
in all carduelines, the prepalatine bar is flared at its juncture with
the premaxilla, and that the mediopalatine processes are fused across
the midline; noncardueline fringillids lack these characteristics. In
addition to the above he cites differences between the carduelines and
the "other" fringillids in the appendicular skeletons, in geographic
distribution, in patterns of migration, and in habits. Tordoff
concludes, therefore, that the carduelines are not fringillids but
ploceids, their closest affinities being with the ploceid Subfamily
Estrildinae. On the basis of palatal structure, the Fringillinae and
Geospizinae are combined with the Emberizinae, the name Fringillinae
being maintained for the subfamily. The tanagers merge with the
Richmondeninae on the one hand and with the Fringillinae on the other.
On this basis, Tordoff (1954:32) suggests that the Family Fringillidae
be divided into subfamilies as follows: Richmondeninae, Thraupinae,
and Fringillinae. The carduelines are placed as the Subfamily
Carduelinae in the Family Ploceidae.
From the foregoing, it is apparent that the two most recent lines of
research have given rise to conflicting theories regarding
relationships within the Family Fringillidae. The purpose of my
investigation, therefore, has been to gather information, from other
fields, which might clarify the relationships of these birds.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account