Falcons more related to parrots than to hawks

Adam Khor

A new genetic study suggests that, far from being closely related to other raptors, falcons (such as the peregrine falcon or the kestrel) are actually the closest living relatives to parrots (with parrots being the closest relatives to songbirds). It seems that bird classiffication may change quite a lot with these studies, with parrots and songbirds being re-located in a new group, Psittacopasserae. Together with falcons, the Psittacopasserae would be called the Eufalconimorphae.

Also, it seems that grebes aren´t related to loons, but to flamingos, and that hummingbirds and swifts evolved from nocturnal nightjars (!).

steddyeddy

When it comes to birds I would tend to have a simular view of them I have with fish, that is convergent evolution played a big part in making a lot of non related species look alike. The same applies for mammals and even species in different taxan and families. For example the echidna and hedgehog have both evolved spines for protection but the echidna is a marsupial and thus in a different infra class of mammals to the hedgehog. The bird thing doesnt surprise me the amount of taxon we had to learn off in college classed with a lot we learned about in molecular relationships. IMO genetic studies will reveal a lot about how closely related or not as the case may be are.

Adam Khor

steddyeddy wrote: »

When it comes to birds I would tend to have a simular view of them I have with fish, that is convergent evolution played a big part in making a lot of non related species look alike. The same applies for mammals and even species in different taxan and families. For example the echidna and hedgehog have both evolved spines for protection but the echidna is a marsupial and thus in a different infra class of mammals to the hedgehog. The bird thing doesnt surprise me the amount of taxon we had to learn off in college classed with a lot we learned about in molecular relationships. IMO genetic studies will reveal a lot about how closely related or not as the case may be are.

I just want to know who's the owl's closest relatives, as it used to be said that it was nightjars and then, that it was parrots (!!), but then they said parrots were most closely related to pigeons (!!!)...and now this

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

I just want to know who's the owl's closest relatives, as it used to be said that it was nightjars and then, that it was parrots (!!), but then they said parrots were most closely related to pigeons (!!!)...and now this

They used to assign taxon based on teeth in some animals, beak and skull shape in others and now genetic and molecular studies. The original taxon were based on somewhat shaky grounds imho however theres a lot of politics involved in assigning taxon so dont expect a change just yet! I wouldnt even like to guess at the owl's closest relative without looking at its genetic code.

snowstreams

Another interesting group of animals that I keep wondering about are bats.
Are the megabats and microbats really related?
The evidence keeps changing from saying that they are unrelated due to bone evidence and that flying foxes are more closely related to primates.
Then genetic studies seem to say that the two groups of bats are closely related.
Convergent evolution must work in mysterious ways!

Adam Khor

snowstreams wrote: »

Another interesting group of animals that I keep wondering about are bats.
Are the megabats and microbats really related?
The evidence keeps changing from saying that they are unrelated due to bone evidence and that flying foxes are more closely related to primates.
Then genetic studies seem to say that the two groups of bats are closely related.
Convergent evolution must work in mysterious ways!

Agreed... but let us admit that flying primates would've been awesome

steddyeddy

Adam Khor wrote: »

Agreed... but let us admit that flying primates would've been awesome

Like in the wizard of oz