Diversification history in the Dendrocincla fuliginosa complex (Aves: Dendrocolaptidae): Insights from broad geographic sampling

Abstract

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Genomic data reveal a protracted window of introgression during the diversification of a neotropical woodcreeper radiation*

“…Importantly, a recent phylogeographic study (Schultz et al. ) sequenced a single nuclear gene and mitochondrial DNA for all subspecies of D. fuliginosa and found that the four subspecies that we failed to sample do not represent genetically diverged lineages but rather were nested phylogenetically within subspecies we did sample (e.g., D. f. lafresnayei is nested within the sampled D. f. ridgwayi ; D. f. deltana , and D. f. barinensis were nested with the sampled D. f. meruloides ; D. f. phaeochroa was nested with the sampled D. f. neglecta ). We thus had complete sampling of all phylogenetically distinct subspecies within D. fuliginosa .…”

“…Most subspecies were monophyletic with strong support with three exceptions: support for monophyly of D. m. merula and D. m. obidensis was low, D. m. castanoptera was paraphyletic with respect to D. m. badia (with our sole sample of D. m. castanoptera from the interfluve between the Xingu and Tocantins rivers grouping with D. m. badia , suggesting that populations from this interfluve should either be transferred to D. m. badia or be recognized as a new subspecies) and the two samples of D. f. meruloides were nested within those of D. f. neglecta , contrary to two studies that found these taxa to be reciprocally monophyletic, but whose analyses were based on few genes and were dominated by a mitochondrial DNA signal (Weir and Price ; Schultz et al. ).…”

“…Additionally , D. f. fuliginosa and D. f. rufoolivacea are more closely related to one another than with D. f. atrirostris , and there is strong support for the placement of D. f. atrirostris that was previously uncertain when analyzing only a small number of genes (Weir and Price ; Schultz et al. ). An earlier study recovered low support for the sister relationship between D. merula and D. tyrannina (Weir and Price ).…”

“…; Schultz et al. ). These inconsistencies may be the result of insufficient data or errors in inference.…”

“…Phylogeographic analysis has demonstrated that a number of subspecies are deeply diverged genetically (Weir and Price ; Schultz et al. ), and some of these could represent distinct species. Available phylogenetic studies of the genus are based on just a few loci and show no consensus on deeper level phylogenetic relationships as well as between some of the relationships between subspecies within species (Weir and Price ; Derryberry et al.…”