DOCSLIB.ORG

Morphometric Analysis of the Gull Larus (Aves:Laridae) with Implications for Small Theropod Diversity in the Late Cretaceous

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Morphometric Analysis of the Gull Larus (Aves:Laridae) with Implications for Small Theropod Diversity in the Late Cretaceous Morphometric analysis of the gull Larus (Aves:Laridae) with implications for small theropod diversity in the Late Cretaceous by Michel Haché A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Earth Science Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario © 2016, Michel Haché Abstract This project analyzed morphological diversity in the modern gull (Aves: Charadriiformes) genus Larus. Measurements of the post-cranial skeletons were made on specimens from six species of Larus and analyzed using Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Similar analyses were conducted on a series of theropod taxa. Landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis was also conducted on select skulls of gulls and analyzed using PCA. The results show that most of the gull species are very similar for the morphological parameters analyzed, only differing in overall body size, and, thus cannot be easily distinguished based on their skeletal morphology. These results were used as a modern analogue for inferring species diversity in the theropod fossil record. The implications of this study suggest that skeletal morphology, without the addition of soft tissue and behavior data available for modern birds, may not be able to distinguish closely related species of interbreeding, non-avian theropods in the fossil record. This suggests that the species diversity of extinct non-avian theropods was likely higher than can be of determined from their skeletal remains. 1 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr. Michael Ryan and Dr. Tim Patterson for their support over the past two years. I would like to thank Elizabeth Anderson for her patience and for helping me with writing this thesis. I would also like to thank Michel Goselin and the staff of the Canadian Museum of Nature for helping me with my data collection and allowing me access to the museum‘s collection. I would like to thank Mark Peck for helping me with the data collection of the specimens at the Royal Ontario Museum. I also want to thank Dr. Phil Currie for providing me with his database of theropod measurements. I want to thank everyone in the Patterson Research Group for their help and support. A special thank you to all my friends and family for all the support they‘ve given in the past three years. This research was, in part, supported by a NSERC Discovery Grant to Tim Patterson. 2 Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................ 1 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... 3 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 5 List of figures ..................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................ 7 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Project goals ..................................................................................................................... 13 1.3 Gulls.................................................................................................................................... 14 1.4 Avian evolution ................................................................................................................. 16 1.5 Laridae taxonomy ............................................................................................................. 20 1.6 Previous morphometric analyses of dinosaurs ............................................................ 24 1.7 Theropod taxonomy ......................................................................................................... 31 Chapter 2: Materials and Methods .................................................................. 39 2.1 Gull species analyzed ...................................................................................................... 39 2.2 Theropod taxa analyzed .................................................................................................. 43 2.3 Data collection .................................................................................................................. 49 2.4 Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 57 3.1 Gull postcranial morphometric analysis ........................................................................ 59 3.2 Intraspecific morphological variation ............................................................................. 66 3.3 Gull cranial morphometric analysis ............................................................................... 76 3.4 Theropod morphometrics analysis ................................................................................ 87 3 Chapter 4: Discussion .............................................................................................. 103 Conclusions................................................................................................................. 113 Appendices .................................................................................................................. 116 Appendix A Averaged measurements for the gull specimens ....................................... 116 Appendix B Standardized gull measurements ................................................................. 119 Appendix C Measurements of Theropod Specimens ...................................................... 121 Appendix D Loading of PC 1 and 2 of each analysis ...................................................... 125 Appendix E Landmarks digitized on Larus skulls ............................................................ 126 Appendix F Landmark location ........................................................................................... 127 References ................................................................................................................... 128 4 List of Tables Table 1: ........................................................................................................................43 Table 2 ..........................................................................................................................61 Table 3: .........................................................................................................................61 Table 4: .........................................................................................................................68 Table 5: .........................................................................................................................68 Table 6: .........................................................................................................................73 Table 7: .........................................................................................................................73 Table 8: .........................................................................................................................76 Table 9 ..........................................................................................................................76 Table 10 ........................................................................................................................77 Table 11 ........................................................................................................................83 Table 12 ........................................................................................................................90 Table 13 ........................................................................................................................90 Table 14 ........................................................................................................................95 Table 15 ........................................................................................................................95 Table 16 ........................................................................................................................98 Table 17 ........................................................................................................................98 5 List of figures Figure 1 ............................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 2 ............................................................................................................................. 19 Figure 3 ............................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 4 ............................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 5 ............................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 6 ............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ontogeny Reveals Function and Evolution of the Hadrosaurid Dinosaur Dental Battery Aaron R
    LeBlanc et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology (2016) 16:152 DOI 10.1186/s12862-016-0721-1 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Ontogeny reveals function and evolution of the hadrosaurid dinosaur dental battery Aaron R. H. LeBlanc1*, Robert R. Reisz1,2, David C. Evans3 and Alida M. Bailleul4 Abstract Background: Hadrosaurid dinosaurs, dominant Late Cretaceous herbivores, possessed complex dental batteries with up to 300 teeth in each jaw ramus. Despite extensive interest in the adaptive significance of the dental battery, surprisingly little is known about how the battery evolved from the ancestral dinosaurian dentition, or how it functioned in the living organism. We undertook the first comprehensive, tissue-level study of dental ontogeny in hadrosaurids using several intact maxillary and dentary batteries and compared them to sections of other archosaurs and mammals. We used these comparisons to pinpoint shifts in the ancestral reptilian pattern of tooth ontogeny that allowed hadrosaurids to form complex dental batteries. Results: Comparisons of hadrosaurid dental ontogeny with that of other amniotes reveals that the ability to halt normal tooth replacement and functionalize the tooth root into the occlusal surface was key to the evolution of dental batteries. The retention of older generations of teeth was driven by acceleration in the timing and rate of dental tissue formation. The hadrosaurid dental battery is a highly modified form of the typical dinosaurian gomphosis with a unique tooth-to-tooth attachment that permitted constant and perfectly timed tooth eruption along the whole battery. Conclusions: We demonstrate that each battery was a highly dynamic, integrated matrix of living replacement and, remarkably, dead grinding teeth connected by a network of ligaments that permitted fine scale flexibility within the battery.
    [Show full text]
  • Order CHARADRIIFORMES: Waders, Gulls and Terns Suborder LARI
    Text extracted from Gill B.J.; Bell, B.D.; Chambers, G.K.; Medway, D.G.; Palma, R.L.; Scofield, R.P.; Tennyson, A.J.D.; Worthy, T.H. 2010. Checklist of the birds of New Zealand, Norfolk and Macquarie Islands, and the Ross Dependency, Antarctica. 4th edition. Wellington, Te Papa Press and Ornithological Society of New Zealand. Pages 191, 223 & 227-228. Order CHARADRIIFORMES: Waders, Gulls and Terns The family sequence of Christidis & Boles (1994), who adopted that of Sibley et al. (1988) and Sibley & Monroe (1990), is followed here. Suborder LARI: Skuas, Gulls, Terns and Skimmers Condon (1975) and Checklist Committee (1990) recognised three subfamilies within the Laridae (Larinae, Sterninae and Megalopterinae) but this division has not been widely adopted. We follow Gochfeld & Burger (1996) in recognising gulls in one family (Laridae) and terns and noddies in another (Sternidae). The sequence of species for Stercorariidae and Laridae follows Peters (1934) and for Sternidae follows Bridge et al. (2005). Family LARIDAE Rafinesque: Gulls Laridia Rafinesque, 1815: Analyse de la Nature: 72 – Type genus Larus Linnaeus, 1758. Genus Larus Linnaeus Larus Linnaeus, 1758: Syst. Nat., 10th edition 1: 136 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus marinus Linnaeus. Gavia Boie, 1822: Isis von Oken, Heft 10: col. 563 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus ridibundus Linnaeus. Junior homonym of Gavia Moehring, 1758. Hydrocoleus Kaup, 1829: Skizz. Entw.-Gesch. Eur. Thierw.: 113 – Type species (by subsequent designation) Larus minutus Linnaeus. Chroicocephalus Eyton, 1836: Cat. Brit. Birds: 53 – Type species (by monotypy) Larus cucullatus Reichenbach = Larus pipixcan Wagler. Gelastes Bonaparte, 1853: Journ. für Ornith.
    [Show full text]
  • Bakalářská Práce
    Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci Bakalářská práce Olomouc 2018 Monika Klaclová Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci Přírodovědecká fakulta Katedra botaniky Cross-species amplifikace mikrosatelitů z řádu tučňáci a konzervovaných ptačích mikrosatelitů u plameňáka růžového (Phoenicopterus roseus) Bakalářská práce Monika Klaclová Studijní program: Matematika Studijní obor: Matematika-Biologie Forma studia: Prezenční Olomouc 2018 Vedoucí práce: RNDr. Petr Nádvorník, Ph.D. Prohlašuji, že jsem tuto bakalářskou práci vypracovala samostatně pod vedením RNDr. Petra Nádvorníka, Ph.D. za použití uvedených literárních zdrojů. V Olomouci dne 27. 07. 2018 podpis: ............................ Monika Klaclová ii Srdečně děkuji vedoucímu bakalářské práce RNDr. Petru Nádvorníkovi, Ph.D. za věnovaný čas a odborné rady, které mi poskytl při zpracování této bakalářské práce. Dále děkuji kolektivu Laboratoře populační genetiky na Katedře buněčné biologie a genetiky Přírodovědecké fakulty Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci za zpříjemnění pracovního prostředí. iii Bibliografická identifikace Jméno a příjmení: Monika Klaclová Název práce: Cross-species amplifikace mikrosatelitů z řádu tučňáci a konzervovaných ptačích mikrosatelitů u plameňáka růžového (Phoenicopterus roseus) Typ práce: Bakalářská práce Pracoviště: Katedra buněčné biologie a genetiky, Přírodovědecká fakulta Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci Vedoucí práce: RNDr. Petr Nádvorník, Ph.D. Rok obhajoby: 2018 Abstrakt V této bakalářské práci jsem se zabývala hledáním polymorfních mikrosatelitů u plameňáka růžového
    [Show full text]
  • PTAČÍ FYLOGENEZE Dovnitř Patří Šplhavci
    E Afroaves – řada linií této skupiny je velmi rozrůzněna v Africe a pro Afriku stepokur kropenatý typická (vlhy, zoborožci, mandelíci), ale fosilie africký původ nepodporují. Mnoho (Pterocles burchelli) linií bylo řazeno do řádu srostloprstých, ale ten není monofyletický, poněvadž PTAČÍ FYLOGENEZE dovnitř patří šplhavci. Patří sem i myšáci (Coliiformes) a trogoni. F Australaves – obdobně jako u Afroaves dnes sice řada linií žije jen FYLOGENEZE NA HRUBÉ ÚROVNI A PTAČÍ ŘÁDY v australasijské oblasti, ale fosilní zástupci byli nalezeni všude možně, takže o původu skupiny těžko něco soudit. Zobrazený fylogenetický stromeček zahrnuje jen velké skupiny, přičemž co je „velká“ skupina, je docela arbitrární. Aby vůbec bylo možné dělat O Passerimorphae (nebo Psittacopasserae) – papoušci korektní fylogenetické analýzy, nesmí být těch skupin moc a zároveň je potřeba, aby to byly skupiny, o nichž se předpokládá, že jsou a pěvci sdílejí řadu znaků, například schopnost učit se zpěvu, která byla monofyletické. Reálně se totiž sekvenují samozřejmě jednotliví zástupci (tedy jeden druh, respektive přímo jeden jedinec z dané skupiny), považovaná za klíčovou pro jejich sloučení (pokládala se za znak vzniklý jen a potřebujeme tedy, aby skutečně skupinu reprezentovali. Proto by nestačilo brát zástupce tradičních ptačích řádů, které známe z učebnic, jednou u jejich společného předka, tedy synapomorfii). Ovšem vzhledem k tomu, jelikož se ukázalo, že řada z nich monofyletických není. Tradiční „dravci“ byli například polyfyletičtí, poněvadž zahrnovali monofyletickou že u pěvců je s jistotou známa jen ve skupině Oscines (zpěvní) a navíc se vyskytuje skupinu složenou z orlů, jestřábů, káňat apod. (včetně kondorů), ale taky sokolovité (poštolky, sokoly apod.), kteří jsou ve skutečnosti blízce také u zcela nezávislých kolibříků, musela vzniknout víckrát konvergentně, a to příbuzní pěvcům a papouškům.
    [Show full text]
  • Giardiasis Importance Giardiasis, a Gastrointestinal Disease Characterized by Acute Or Chronic Diarrhea, Is Caused by Protozoan Parasites in the Genus Giardia
    Giardiasis Importance Giardiasis, a gastrointestinal disease characterized by acute or chronic diarrhea, is caused by protozoan parasites in the genus Giardia. Giardia duodenalis is the major Giardia Enteritis, species found in mammals, and the only species known to cause illness in humans. This Lambliasis, organism is carried in the intestinal tract of many animals and people, with clinical signs Beaver Fever developing in some individuals, but many others remaining asymptomatic. In addition to diarrhea, the presence of G. duodenalis can result in malabsorption; some studies have implicated this organism in decreased growth in some infected children and Last Updated: December 2012 possibly decreased productivity in young livestock. Outbreaks are occasionally reported in people, as the result of mass exposure to contaminated water or food, or direct contact with infected individuals (e.g., in child care centers). People are considered to be the most important reservoir hosts for human giardiasis. The predominant genetic types of G. duodenalis usually differ in humans and domesticated animals (livestock and pets), and zoonotic transmission is currently thought to be of minor significance in causing human illness. Nevertheless, there is evidence that certain isolates may sometimes be shared, and some genetic types of G. duodenalis (assemblages A and B) should be considered potentially zoonotic. Etiology The protozoan genus Giardia (Family Giardiidae, order Giardiida) contains at least six species that infect animals and/or humans. In most mammals, giardiasis is caused by Giardia duodenalis, which is also called G. intestinalis. Both names are in current use, although the validity of the name G. intestinalis depends on the interpretation of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tarsometatarsus of the Middle Eocene Loon Colymbiculus Udovichenkoi
    – 17 – Paleornithological Research 2013 Proceed. 8th Inter nat. Meeting Society of Avian Paleontology and Evolution Ursula B. Göhlich & Andreas Kroh (Eds) The tarsometatarsus of the Middle Eocene loon Colymbiculus udovichenkoi GERALD MAYR1, LEONID GOROBETS2 & EVGENIJ ZVONOK3 1 Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; E-mail: [email protected] 2 Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev, Dept. of Ecology and Environmental Protection, Kiev, Ukraine 3 Institute of Geological Sciences of NAS of Ukraine, Branch of Paleontology and Stratigraphy, Kiev, Ukraine Abstract — We describe the previously unknown tarsometatarsus of the earliest unambiguously identified loon, Colymbiculus udovichenkoi, from the Middle Eocene of the Ukraine. Except for being more elongate and apart from details of the hypotarsus morphology, the bone resembles the tarsometatarsus of the Early Miocene Colym- boides minutus. We consider the hypotarsus morphology of Colymbiculus to be plesiomorphic for Gaviiformes. Colymboides and crown group Gaviiformes are each characterized by an autapomorphic hypotarsus morphology, which precludes the former from being directly ancestral to the latter. The similarities shared by C. udovichenkoi and C. minutus, including their small size, are likely to be plesiomorphic for Gaviiformes. Although the disap- pearance of small stem group Gaviiformes may be related to the retreat of loons to cold Northern latitudes, more data are needed to firmly establish this hypothesis. We finally note that early Paleogene stem group Gaviiformes markedly differ from putative Late Cretaceous loons, whose identification needs to be verified by further fossil specimens. Key words: Colymbiculus, Colymboides, fossil birds, Gaviiformes, Eocene, Lutetian, Ukraine Introduction 1982 from the Early Miocene of the Czech Republic (ŠVEC 1982), the earliest stem line- Loons (Gaviiformes) have a fairly comprehen- age representative, being distinctly smaller than sive Neogene fossil record (OLSON 1985; MAYR its modern congeners.
    [Show full text]
  • Theropod Teeth from the Upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New Morphotypes and Faunal Comparisons
    Theropod teeth from the upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New morphotypes and faunal comparisons TERRY A. GATES, LINDSAY E. ZANNO, and PETER J. MAKOVICKY Gates, T.A., Zanno, L.E., and Makovicky, P.J. 2015. Theropod teeth from the upper Maastrichtian Hell Creek Formation “Sue” Quarry: New morphotypes and faunal comparisons. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 60 (1): 131–139. Isolated teeth from vertebrate microfossil localities often provide unique information on the biodiversity of ancient ecosystems that might otherwise remain unrecognized. Microfossil sampling is a particularly valuable tool for doc- umenting taxa that are poorly represented in macrofossil surveys due to small body size, fragile skeletal structure, or relatively low ecosystem abundance. Because biodiversity patterns in the late Maastrichtian of North American are the primary data for a broad array of studies regarding non-avian dinosaur extinction in the terminal Cretaceous, intensive sampling on multiple scales is critical to understanding the nature of this event. We address theropod biodiversity in the Maastrichtian by examining teeth collected from the Hell Creek Formation locality that yielded FMNH PR 2081 (the Tyrannosaurus rex specimen “Sue”). Eight morphotypes (three previously undocumented) are identified in the sample, representing Tyrannosauridae, Dromaeosauridae, Troodontidae, and Avialae. Noticeably absent are teeth attributed to the morphotypes Richardoestesia and Paronychodon. Morphometric comparison to dromaeosaurid teeth from multiple Hell Creek and Lance formations microsites reveals two unique dromaeosaurid morphotypes bearing finer distal denticles than present on teeth of similar size, and also differences in crown shape in at least one of these. These findings suggest more dromaeosaurid taxa, and a higher Maastrichtian biodiversity, than previously appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan—Pacific Region
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan Conservation Seabird Pacific Region U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seabird Conservation Plan—Pacific Region 120 0’0"E 140 0’0"E 160 0’0"E 180 0’0" 160 0’0"W 140 0’0"W 120 0’0"W 100 0’0"W RUSSIA CANADA 0’0"N 0’0"N 50 50 WA CHINA US Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Region OR ID AN NV JAP CA H A 0’0"N I W 0’0"N 30 S A 30 N L I ort I Main Hawaiian Islands Commonwealth of the hwe A stern A (see inset below) Northern Mariana Islands Haw N aiian Isla D N nds S P a c i f i c Wake Atoll S ND ANA O c e a n LA RI IS Johnston Atoll MA Guam L I 0’0"N 0’0"N N 10 10 Kingman Reef E Palmyra Atoll I S 160 0’0"W 158 0’0"W 156 0’0"W L Howland Island Equator A M a i n H a w a i i a n I s l a n d s Baker Island Jarvis N P H O E N I X D IN D Island Kauai S 0’0"N ONE 0’0"N I S L A N D S 22 SI 22 A PAPUA NEW Niihau Oahu GUINEA Molokai Maui 0’0"S Lanai 0’0"S 10 AMERICAN P a c i f i c 10 Kahoolawe SAMOA O c e a n Hawaii 0’0"N 0’0"N 20 FIJI 20 AUSTRALIA 0 200 Miles 0 2,000 ES - OTS/FR Miles September 2003 160 0’0"W 158 0’0"W 156 0’0"W (800) 244-WILD http://www.fws.gov Information U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Raptorial Dinosaur with Exceptionally Long Feathering Provides Insights Into Dromaeosaurid flight Performance
    ARTICLE Received 11 Apr 2014 | Accepted 11 Jun 2014 | Published 15 Jul 2014 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5382 A new raptorial dinosaur with exceptionally long feathering provides insights into dromaeosaurid flight performance Gang Han1, Luis M. Chiappe2, Shu-An Ji1,3, Michael Habib4, Alan H. Turner5, Anusuya Chinsamy6, Xueling Liu1 & Lizhuo Han1 Microraptorines are a group of predatory dromaeosaurid theropod dinosaurs with aero- dynamic capacity. These close relatives of birds are essential for testing hypotheses explaining the origin and early evolution of avian flight. Here we describe a new ‘four-winged’ microraptorine, Changyuraptor yangi, from the Early Cretaceous Jehol Biota of China. With tail feathers that are nearly 30 cm long, roughly 30% the length of the skeleton, the new fossil possesses the longest known feathers for any non-avian dinosaur. Furthermore, it is the largest theropod with long, pennaceous feathers attached to the lower hind limbs (that is, ‘hindwings’). The lengthy feathered tail of the new fossil provides insight into the flight performance of microraptorines and how they may have maintained aerial competency at larger body sizes. We demonstrate how the low-aspect-ratio tail of the new fossil would have acted as a pitch control structure reducing descent speed and thus playing a key role in landing. 1 Paleontological Center, Bohai University, 19 Keji Road, New Shongshan District, Jinzhou, Liaoning Province 121013, China. 2 Dinosaur Institute, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90007, USA. 3 Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, 26 Baiwanzhuang Road, Beijing 100037, China. 4 University of Southern California, Health Sciences Campus, BMT 403, Mail Code 9112, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article Nematodes of Birds of Armenia
    Annals of Parasitology 2020, 66(4), 447–455 Copyright© 2020 Polish Parasitological Society doi: 10.17420/ap6604.285 Review article Nematodes of birds of Armenia Sergey O. MOVSESYAN1,2, Egor A. VLASOV3, Manya A. NIKOGHOSIAN2, Rosa A. PETROSIAN2, Mamikon G. GHASABYAN2,4, Dmitry N. KUZNETSOV1,5 1Centre of Parasitology, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution RAS, Leninsky pr., 33, Moscow 119071, Russia 2Institute of Zoology, Scientific Center of Zoology and Hydroecology NAS RA, P. Sevak 7, Yerevan 0014, Armenia 3V.V. Alekhin Central-Chernozem State Nature Biosphere Reserve, Zapovednyi, Kursk district, Kursk region, 305528, Russia 4Armenian Society for the Protection of Birds (ASPB), G. Njdeh, 27/2, apt.10, Yerevan 0026, Armenia 5All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Fundamental and Applied Parasitology of Animals and Plants - a branch of the Federal State Budget Scientific Institution “Federal Scientific Centre VIEV”, Bolshaya Cheremushkinskaya str., 28, Moscow 117218, Russia Corresponding Author: Dmitry N. KUZNETSOV; e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT. The review provides data on species composition of nematodes in 50 species of birds from Armenia (South of Lesser Caucasus). Most of the studied birds belong to Passeriformes and Charadriiformes orders. One of the studied species of birds (Larus armenicus) is an endemic. The taxonomy and host-specificity of nematodes reported in original papers are discussed with a regard to current knowledge about this point. In total, 52 nematode species parasitizing birds in Armenia are reported. Most of the reported species of nematodes are quite common in birds outside of Armenia. One species (Desmidocercella incognita from great cormorant) was first identified in Armenia.
    [Show full text]
  • Tinamiformes – Falconiformes
    LIST OF THE 2,008 BIRD SPECIES (WITH SCIENTIFIC AND ENGLISH NAMES) KNOWN FROM THE A.O.U. CHECK-LIST AREA. Notes: "(A)" = accidental/casualin A.O.U. area; "(H)" -- recordedin A.O.U. area only from Hawaii; "(I)" = introducedinto A.O.U. area; "(N)" = has not bred in A.O.U. area but occursregularly as nonbreedingvisitor; "?" precedingname = extinct. TINAMIFORMES TINAMIDAE Tinamus major Great Tinamou. Nothocercusbonapartei Highland Tinamou. Crypturellus soui Little Tinamou. Crypturelluscinnamomeus Thicket Tinamou. Crypturellusboucardi Slaty-breastedTinamou. Crypturellus kerriae Choco Tinamou. GAVIIFORMES GAVIIDAE Gavia stellata Red-throated Loon. Gavia arctica Arctic Loon. Gavia pacifica Pacific Loon. Gavia immer Common Loon. Gavia adamsii Yellow-billed Loon. PODICIPEDIFORMES PODICIPEDIDAE Tachybaptusdominicus Least Grebe. Podilymbuspodiceps Pied-billed Grebe. ?Podilymbusgigas Atitlan Grebe. Podicepsauritus Horned Grebe. Podicepsgrisegena Red-neckedGrebe. Podicepsnigricollis Eared Grebe. Aechmophorusoccidentalis Western Grebe. Aechmophorusclarkii Clark's Grebe. PROCELLARIIFORMES DIOMEDEIDAE Thalassarchechlororhynchos Yellow-nosed Albatross. (A) Thalassarchecauta Shy Albatross.(A) Thalassarchemelanophris Black-browed Albatross. (A) Phoebetriapalpebrata Light-mantled Albatross. (A) Diomedea exulans WanderingAlbatross. (A) Phoebastriaimmutabilis Laysan Albatross. Phoebastrianigripes Black-lootedAlbatross. Phoebastriaalbatrus Short-tailedAlbatross. (N) PROCELLARIIDAE Fulmarus glacialis Northern Fulmar. Pterodroma neglecta KermadecPetrel. (A) Pterodroma
    [Show full text]
  • Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor How They Arise, Modify and Vanish
    Fascinating Life Sciences Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor Bird Species How They Arise, Modify and Vanish Fascinating Life Sciences This interdisciplinary series brings together the most essential and captivating topics in the life sciences. They range from the plant sciences to zoology, from the microbiome to macrobiome, and from basic biology to biotechnology. The series not only highlights fascinating research; it also discusses major challenges associated with the life sciences and related disciplines and outlines future research directions. Individual volumes provide in-depth information, are richly illustrated with photographs, illustrations, and maps, and feature suggestions for further reading or glossaries where appropriate. Interested researchers in all areas of the life sciences, as well as biology enthusiasts, will find the series’ interdisciplinary focus and highly readable volumes especially appealing. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15408 Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor Bird Species How They Arise, Modify and Vanish Editor Dieter Thomas Tietze Natural History Museum Basel Basel, Switzerland ISSN 2509-6745 ISSN 2509-6753 (electronic) Fascinating Life Sciences ISBN 978-3-319-91688-0 ISBN 978-3-319-91689-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91689-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018948152 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018. This book is an open access publication. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
    [Show full text]