D .W . .5 / DY a 5D t w[ { wt Ç"" " !W5 í ÇI &'(' / b ù b a L w 5 ! ) " í "* " Ç t+ t " h " * { b ù" t* /'0/( )' 1 )&0)) Order ANSERIFORMES: Duck-like Birds This order is best placed within Galloanserimorphae after Ratitae following Knox et al. (2002). The higher taxonomy is based on Checklist Committee (1990) modified to reflect the common features of the relationships shown and / or taxonomies proposed in Madsen et al. (1988), Livezey (1989, 1990, 1991, 1996a–c, 1997a,b), Sibley & Ahlquist (1990), del Hoyo et al. (1992), McCracken et al. (1999), Sorenson et al. (1999), Donne-Goussé et al. (2002) and Callaghan & Harshman (2005). Anseriformes is taken to have three families: Anhimidae (screamers) confined to South America, Anseranatidae (magpie goose) monotypic of Australia, and Anatidae. Within Anatidae, it is traditionally considered that the whistling ducks Dendrocygna and Thalassornis are basal, and that the rest of Anatidae formed two major clades: Anserinae (swans and geese) and Anatinae (all other taxa). However, we follow Checklist Committee (1990) and Marchant & Higgins (1990), and in part Livezey (1997b), Dickinson (2003) and Callaghan & Harshman (2005), in treating shelducks and kin, sea ducks, and stiff-tailed ducks as subfamilies: Tadorninae, Merginae, and Oxyurinae respectively. To these is added the basal monotypic anseriform Stictonetta of Australia in Stictonettinae. Recent analyses, based on skeletal and plumage features resulting in a complete anseriform phylogeny (Livezey 1997b), found an association between Aythyini, Mergini, Oxyurini, Biziura and other modified diving ducks, in contrast to traditional taxonomies (e.g. Delacour & Mayr 1945, Johnsgard 1968) which had not so related these taxa. Recent DNA analyses (Madsen et al. 1988, Sibley & Ahlquist 1990, Sraml et al. 1996, Johnson & Sorenson 1999, McCracken et al. 1999, Sorenson et al. 1999, Donne-Goussé et al. 2002, McCracken & Sorenson 2005) indicated that these taxa have no close relationships to one another, and that their diving specialisations have resulted in morphological convergence that obscures phylogeny. The stiff-tailed ducks (Oxyura and allies) are considered more basal than Anatinae, following Madsen et al. (1988), Sibley et al. (1988), Sibley & Ahlquist (1990), Marchant & Higgins (1990), Sraml et al. (1996), Callaghan & Harshman (2005), Worthy & Lee (2008) and Worthy (2009), and so are placed after Dendrocygna and Anserinae. Recent genetic studies, e.g. Sraml et al. (1996) and McCracken et al. (1999), provided strong evidence that Biziura is not closely related to Oxyura, although both taxa lie outside Anatinae. Callaghan & Harshman (2005) did not allocate Biziura to a subfamily, leaving its position in the phylogeny of Anatidae as incertae sedis. Worthy (2009) found it to be a member of Oxyurinae. So, pending resolution of its higher relationships, Biziura is retained in Oxyurinae. Cereopsis is accepted as a member of Anserinae following Livezey (1989, 1997b), Marchant & Higgins (1990), Donne-Goussé et al. (2002) and Callaghan & Harshman (2005). We have not placed Cnemiornis in its own monotypic family (Cnemiornithidae), as suggested by Livezey (1989) and followed by Callaghan & Harshman (2005), because later analyses failed to support this. The shelducks and sheldgeese form a monophyletic clade in most studies (e.g. Livezey 1997a,b; Sorenson et al. 1999; Donne-Goussé et al. 2002), which we place at the subfamilial level before Anatinae, following Checklist Committee (1990), Marchant & Higgins (1990), Livezey (1997b), Dickinson (2003) and Callaghan & Harshman (2005). Livezey (1997a,b) resurrected Casarca for the unbanded shelducks, restricting Tadorna to T. tadorna and T. radjah. In this scheme the paradise shelduck would be Casarca variegata in the subgenus Pseudotadorna Kuroda, 1917 with C. tadornoides and C. cristata. Here we follow the more conservative approach of allying all shelducks in one genus, as did Kear (2005). The placement of Malacorhynchus in the anatid phylogeny is problematic because it is monotypic, at least in the recent fauna, and poorly studied: it has been included in just one genetic analysis to date. We depart from the conservative placement of Malacorhynchus early in the sequence within Anatinae (e.g. Marchant & Higgins 1990, Livezey 1997b, Dickinson 2003, Callaghan & Harshman 2005), and accept the feather protein evidence (Brush 1976), genetic evidence (Sraml et al. 1996) and morphological and behavioural evidence (Frith 1977, Olson & Feduccia 1980, Worthy & Lee 2008 and Worthy (2009), that in sum suggest it should be classified outside Anatinae and before Tadorninae. Provisionally, we place it between Anserinae and Tadorninae. Fullagar (in Kear 2005: 442) considered this taxon to be part of the old endemic component of Australia’s avifauna with no close relatives elsewhere. Merginae is placed after Tadorninae, rather than after Anatinae, or as Mergini at the end of Anatinae, to reflect the relationships shown by mtDNA studies (Sorenson et al. 1999, Donne-Goussé et al. 2002). We follow the recommendation of Worthy & Olson (2002) that Euryanas finschi is listed as the sister taxon of Chenonetta jubata within Anatinae, contra Livezey (1989, 1997b), who had Euryanas as a monotypic tribe far removed from Chenonetta. Livezey (1997b), followed by Dickinson (2003), also suggested that Hymenolaimus lies within Tadorninae, but without supporting data for that position we leave it within Anatinae following Checklist Committee (1990) and Marchant & Higgins (1990). Authorship of family-group taxa is based on Rafinesque (1815), Leach (1819), Brodkorb (1964), Bock (1994) and Olson (1995). We follow Browning & Munroe (1991) for the publication date of Reichenbach (1853). Suborder ANSERES: Swans, Geese and Ducks Family ANATIDAE Leach: Swans, Geese and Ducks Anatidae Leach, 1819: Eleventh room. In Synopsis Contents British Museum 15th Edition, London: 67 – Type genus Anas Linnaeus, 1758. Subfamily ANATINAE Leach: Ducks Ellman (1861: 7471) named two new species of teal as Anas fusca and A. mediterranea, but he did not give sufficient information to identify them unequivocally. Therefore, Anas fusca Ellman, 1861 and Anas mediterranea Ellman, 1861 are here regarded as nomina dubia. Tribe ANATINI Leach: Typical Ducks Anatidae Leach, 1819: Eleventh room. In Synopsis Contents British Museum 15th Edition, London: 67 – Type genus Anas Linnaeus, 1758. Genus Anas Linnaeus Anas Linnaeus, 1758: Syst. Nat., 10th edition 1: 122 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Anas Boschas Linnaeus = Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus. Anassus Rafinesque, 1815: Analyse de la Nature: 72. Unnecessary nomen novum for Anas Linnaeus 1758. Spatula Boie, 1822: Isis von Oken, Heft 10: col. 564 – Type species (by monotypy) Anas clypeata Linnaeus. Rhynchaspis Stephens, 1824: in Shaw, General Zool. 12(2): 114 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Anas clypeata Linnaeus. Mareca Stephens, 1824: in Shaw, General Zool. 12(2): 130 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Mareca fistularis Stephens = Anas penelope Linnaeus. Querquedula Stephens, 1824: in Shaw, General Zool. 12(2): 142 – Type species (by tautonymy) Anas querquedula Linnaeus. Rhynchoplatus Berthold, 1827: in Latreille, Nat. Fam. Thierreich: 84 – Type species (by monotypy) Anas clypeata Linnaeus. Clypeata Lesson, 1828: Manuel d’Ornith. 2: 416 – Type species (by original designation) Anas clypeata Linnaeus. Spathulea J.D.D. Fleming, 1828: Hist. Brit. Anim. 123 – Type species (by monotypy) Anas clypeata Linnaeus. Nettion Kaup, 1829: Natürl. Syst.: 95 – Type species (by original designation) Anas crecca Linnaeus. Boschas Swainson, 1831: Journ. Royal Inst. Great Britain 2: 20 – Type species (by tautonymy) Anas Boschas Linnaeus = Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus. Nesonetta G.R. Gray, 1844: Gen. Birds 3: 627 – Type species (by original designation) Nesonetta aucklandica G.R. Gray = Anas aucklandica (G.R. Gray). Virago Newton, 1872: Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1871 (41): 651 – Type species (by original designation) Anas punctata Gould = Anas castanea (Eyton). Elasmonetta Salvadori, 1895: Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. 27: 287 – Type species (by monotypy) Anas chlorotis G.R. Gray. Xenonetta J.H. Fleming, 1935: Occas. Papers Roy. Ontario Mus., Zool. 1: 1 – Type species (by original designation) Xenonetta nesiotis J.H. Fleming = Anas nesiotis (J.H. Fleming). All New Zealand teal taxa were regarded as distinct species by most authorities in the first half of the 20th Century. However, in a review of the Anatidae, Delacour & Mayr (1945) advocated placing A. chlorotis as a subspecies of A. aucklandica. This was not followed by Oliver (1955), but Checklist Committee (1953) took Delacour & Mayr’s suggestion a step further and included all the New Zealand teal as subspecies of Anas castanea. This arrangement was later dropped and Delacour & Mayr’s treatment was followed (Checklist Committee 1970, 1990) with the Australian birds kept specifically distinct. Re-examination of the teal complex has since found widespread support for the specific distinction of each of the New Zealand teal in such features as skeletal morphology (Livezey 1990), plumage and behaviour (Marchant & Higgins 1990), allozyme electrophoresis (Daugherty et al. 1999) and DNA studies (Johnson & Sorenson 1998, Kennedy & Spencer 2000). We follow these authors and Livezey (1997b) and Kear (2005) in reinstating each of the New Zealand teal to specific rank. Research indicates that the genetic differences between them is greater than between