Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Vertebrata: Aves: Piciformes) and Implications for Creationist Design Arguments P.A

Vertebrata: Aves: Piciformes) and Implications for Creationist Design Arguments P.A

OPEN ACCESS JCTS Article SERIES B

Baraminological Analysis of the Picidae (Vertebrata: Aves: ) and Implications for Creationist Design Arguments P.A. Garner

Biblical Creation Ministries, Soham, Cambs, UK

Abstract

The Picidae (, and ) comprise a within the near Piciformes. Creationists have often appealed to the unique anatomical and behavioural specializations found in woodpeckers as evidence of divine design. However, until now no baraminological studies of the group have been undertaken. This paper reports a baraminic distance correlation analysis of 50 morphological characters (mostly related to hind limb musculature) and 20 taxa (12 picids and eight outgroup taxa). The results show that the woodpeckers, wrynecks and piculets form a well-defined group united by significant positive correlation and separated from seven of the eight outgroup taxa (barbets, and toucanets) by significant negative correlation. The eighth outgroup taxon, the , was neither positively nor negatively correlated with the other taxa in the dataset. Multidimensional scaling applied to the baraminic distances revealed an orthogonal pattern with ingroup taxa arranged on one axis and outgroup taxa on another, a result that has previously been interpreted as mitigating conclusions of negative discontinuity. However, repeating the analysis without the Indicator, which formed one of the axes, did not change the negative correlation between the picids and non-picids, suggesting that the result cannot be dismissed merely as an artefact of the multidimensional scaling pattern. The results suggest that all members of the Picidae constitute a single holobaramin. This conclusion is consistent with hybridization data indicating the monobaraminic status of at least 12 genera in six of the nine tribes within the Picidae. Since the picids are holobaraminic, and since not all members of the group possess the full range of “typical” characters, this suggests that at least some of these morphological and behavioural traits arose by mediated design during intrabaraminic diversification. This has implications for our understanding of the origin of natural evil (in this case, insectivory) and suggests that standard creationist design arguments concerning woodpecker and behaviour need to be modified.

Editor: T.C. Wood Received January 30, 2012; Accepted January 30, 2014; Published July 7, 2014

©2014 The author. This article is open access and distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium as long as the original author and medium are credited. Citation: Garner. 2014. Baraminological Analysis of the Picidae (Vertebrata: Aves: Piciformes) and Implications for Creationist Design Arguments. Journal of Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 4:1-11. Introduction Table 1. of the Picidae (after Short 1982, Winkler et al. 1995 and Clements et al. 2012). The Piciformes is an order of near passerine comprising several families, including the (Galbulidae), (Bucconidae), (Indicatoridae), barbets (Capitonidae), Subfamily Tribe Genus toucans (Ramphastidae) and woodpeckers (Picidae). This paper Jynginae Jyngini Jynx (2) focuses on the Picidae, which consists of three subfamilies (Short Picumninae Picumnini (26) 1982; Winkler et al. 1995; Clements et al. 2012): the wrynecks (Jynginae), the piculets (Picumninae) and the true woodpeckers (3) (). In all, there are 227 in 28 genera (Table 1). Nesoctitini Nesoctites (1) Members of the family are found worldwide, with the exception Picinae Melanerpini (23) of Australasia, , some remote oceanic and the most extreme polar regions. Most picids are or Sphyrapicus (4) dwelling species, but some inhabit , , tundra Xiphidiopicus (1) and mountain . The wrynecks are small, relatively Campetherini (12) unspecialized birds, and have an exclusively distribution across Eurasia and . The piculets, though small and lacking Geocolaptes (1) the use of the tail as a prop, are otherwise quite woodpecker-like (15) in their habits and are found in the tropics of America, and Africa. The true woodpeckers are generally larger and possess (21) long, stiffened tail and other specializations suited to (12) their pecking and drumming activities; they are widely distributed Colaptini (14) across Eurasia, Africa and the . Most woodpeckers are arboreal and excavate holes in dead timber or live wood in order (7) to build nests and lay . They are frequently insectivorous and (12) forage for prey by probing or prying into crevices in bark, wood (12) or . Some species feed on sap, fruits, berries or nuts. Others raid anthills or nests. Campephilini (7) Woodpeckers display many morphological, anatomical and (11) behavioural features that equip them for their distinctive habits Picini (15) and lifestyle. Most true woodpeckers have feet specialized for vertical climbing and clinging (the ectropodactyl condition; Bock (5) and Miller 1959), although the flickers, like the piculets and (8) wrynecks, which more commonly forage on the ground, have zygodactylous feet. The tail feathers of true woodpeckers usually (2) have stiff central shafts, with longitudinal ridges in some species. Sapheopipo (1) Together, the feet and tail enable the to brace itself firmly (2) against the vertical surface of a tree (Winkler and Bock 1976). The chisel-shaped bill is typically strengthened with a hard, Reinwardtipicus (1) horny covering (ramphotheca). During hammering, woodpeckers Meiglyptini (3) -1 impact the substrate at speeds of about 600-700 cm s (Winkler et (2) al. 1995, p.17). Many suggestions have been made to explain how they avoid brain injury and retinal damage during this activity, (4) including employment of a straight trajectory to ensure minimal rotational or shearing forces, possession of a small subarachnoid space with little cerebrospinal fluid thus reducing the transmission of shock waves, cranial kinesis that directs impact forces towards the more massive ventral portion of the braincase, and muscles at the rear end of the mandible that act as cushions (Bock 1964; Bock 1966; Bock 1999a; Bock 1999b; May et al. 1979; Schwab 2002; Winkler et al. 1995). However, in a re-evaluation of previous studies, Gibson (2006) argued that the three most critical factors were their small size (which minimises the stress on the brain for a given acceleration), the short duration of the impact (which increases the tolerable acceleration) and the orientation of the brain within the (which increases the area of contact between the brain and the skull). Woodpeckers also typically possess an elongated tongue that can be extended well beyond the

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:2 bill tip to permit foraging for . The tongue is supported by according to Clements et al. (2012). the Y-shaped hyoid apparatus, with horns that may, depending on Jyngini. A putative hybrid between the Rufous-necked the length of the tongue, wrap around the head as far as the frontal (Jynx ruficollis) and the (Jynx , encircle the eye, or even extend into the nasal cavity. Prey torquilla) was reported by Desfayes (1969). However, Bock and capture is assisted by a sticky salivary fluid secreted by sublingual Short (1972) regard the specimen as an aberrant Jynx ruficollis. glands and, in many species, the tongue tip is also equipped with Picumnini. Extensive interbreeding is thought have occurred barbs or bristles that are used to spear or sweep up food items. between the White-barred (Picumnus cirratus) and the The unique anatomy of woodpeckers has long been remarked White-wedged Piculet (Picumnus albosquamatus) in and upon by creationists (as evidence of divine design, e.g. Ray Bolivia (McCarthy 2006, p.108; Short 1982, pp.85, 88). Picumnus 1722, p.143; Paley 1826, pp.235-236; Sunderland 1976; albosquamatus also hybridizes with the Morris and Parker 1982, pp.50-51; Bliss 1985; Parker 1994, (Picumnus dorbignyanus) in Bolivia (McCarthy 2006, p.108). pp.56-59; Juhasz 1995-1996) and evolutionists (as evidence of Picumnus cirratus is also known to hybridize with Picumnus evolutionary adaptation, e.g. Darwin 1968 [1859], pp.215-216; dorbignyanus in southern Bolivia (and probably northern Wilson 1992, pp.92-93). However, until now no baraminological ) and with the Ochre-collared Piculet (Picumnus evaluation of the group has been carried out. In this paper, I temminckii) in southeastern Brazil (McCarthy 2006, p.108). will seek to clarify the baraminological status of the Picidae by Hybridization is also reported between Picumnus cirratus and reviewing what is known regarding the picid record and the (Picumnus varzeae) along the interspecific hybridization within the group, and with the results in Brazil (McCarthy 2006, p.108; Short 1982, pp.82-83, 85). A of a baraminic distance correlation (BDC) analysis and classical museum specimen taken in central appears to be a hybrid multidimensional scaling (MDS). between the Plain-breasted Piculet (Picumnus castelnau) and the Fine-barred Piculet (Picumnus subtilis) (McCarthy 2006, p.108). Fossil Record A hybrid between the (Picumnus minutissimus) and the White-bellied Piculet (Picumnus spilogaster) is inferred Picids have a scant fossil record. The stratigraphically-lowest from a museum specimen collected in (McCarthy 2006, known member of the family is an unnamed genus from the p.109). Hybridization is also thought to take place between the Middle (Upper Barstovian) of New , USA Tawny Piculet (Picumnus fulvescens) and the (Benton 1993, p.730; Olson 1985, p.138). Putative earlier forms (Picumnus limae) in northeastern Brazil and between the Grayish are not referable to the Picidae. These include Uintornis lucaris Piculet (Picumnus granadensis) and the from the Bridger Formation of Wyoming, described by (Picumnus olivaceus) in western (McCarthy 2006, Marsh (1872) but no longer regarded as a picid (Shufeldt 1915; pp.108-109). Putative hybrids are also reported between the Cracraft and Morony 1969) and two fossil forms (Palaeopicus (Sasia abnormis) and the White-browed Piculet archiaci and Palaeopicus consobrinus) described from the Upper (Sasia ochracea) in southern and southeastern Thailand of France by Milne-Edwards (1867-1871, Vol. 2, (McCarthy 2006, p.109). pp.396-399) but now reassigned to other families (Mlíkovský Melanerpini. The Golden-fronted Woodpecker (Melanerpes 2002, p.145). Three taxa from France formerly assigned to the aurifrons) is known to hybridize with the Picidae are also of dubious affinities: the Eocene Cryptornis (Melanerpes uropygialis) in southwestern Mexico (McCarthy antiquus (Lambrecht 1933, p.630; Wetmore 1951) and the 2006, p.107; Selander and Giller 1963; Short 1982, p.163). Miocene forms Picus gaudryi and Homalopus picoides (Depéret Melanerpes aurifrons has also been reported to hybridize with 1887). More probable members of the Picidae include Pliopicus Hoffmann’s Woodpecker (Melanerpes hoffmannii) in southern brodkorbi from the Lower of Kansas (Feduccia and (McCarthy 2006, p.107; Monroe 1968, p.215; Short Wilson 1967), Palaeonerpes shorti from the Lower Pliocene of 1982, p.163) and with the Red-bellied Woodpecker (Melanerpes Nebraska (Cracraft and Morony 1969), and Bathoceleus hyphalus carolinus) in an area ranging across southwestern Oklahoma from the of (Brodkorb 1959). A to northern Texas (McCarthy 2006, pp.106-107). Melanerpes in Baltic (Eocene) attributed to Picus by Bachofen-Echt hoffmannii extensively hybridizes with the Red-crowned (1949, p.183) was not studied in sufficient detail to warrant genus- Woodpecker (Melanerpes rubricapillus) in central level identification. A feather in Dominican amber (Oligocene to (McCarthy 2006, p.107). Miocene) has been attributed to the Picidae, specifically a form Frequent hybrids between the Red-naped close to the extant (Nesoctites micromegas), on (Sphyrapicus nuchalis) and the Red-breasted Sapsucker the basis of careful microscopic study (Laybourne et al. 1994; (Sphyrapicus ruber) occur in areas of overlap in British Columbia Poinar 1992, p.240). Short (1982, p.38) had previously surmised and the Cascades (Howell 1952; McCarthy 2006, p.110; Short that the earliest woodpeckers may have resembled this extant 1982, p.179; Shunk 2005). Two hybrids between Sphyrapicus species. nuchalis and Williamson’s Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus thyroideus) have been reported from southern and Mexico (McCarthy Interspecific Hybridization 2006, p.110; Short 1982, pp.177, 184; Short and Morony 1970). Hybrids frequently occur between Sphyrapicus nuchalis and the Interspecific hybrids have been reported within seven of the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) in southwestern nine tribes of the Picidae (see Table 2). The nomenclature used in Alberta (McCarthy 2006, p.110; Short 1982, p.176; Shunk 2005). this section has been updated to reflect recent taxonomic revisions Extensive interbreeding also occurs between Sphyrapicus varius

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:3 Table 2. Established and putative interspecific hybrids within the Picidae.

Subfamily: tribe Species 1 Species 2 Reference Jynginae: Jyngini Jynx ruficollis Jynx torquilla Desfayes (1969); but see Bock and Short (1972)

Picumninae: Picumnus albosquamatus Picumnus cirratus McCarthy (2006); Short (1982) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus albosquamatus Picumnus dorbignyanus McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus castelnau Picumnus subtilis McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus cirratus Picumnus dorbignyanus McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus cirratus Picumnus temminckii McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus cirratus Picumnus varzeae McCarthy (2006); Short (1982) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus fulvescens Picumnus limae McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus granadensis Picumnus olivaceus McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Picumnus minutissimus Picumnus spilogaster McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picumninae: Sasia abnormis Sasia ochracea McCarthy (2006) Picumnini

Picinae: Melanerpini Melanerpes aurifrons Melanerpes carolinus McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Melanerpini Melanerpes aurifrons Melanerpes hoffmannii McCarthy (2006); Monroe (1968); Short (1982)

Picinae: Melanerpini Melanerpes aurifrons Melanerpes uropygialis McCarthy (2006); Selander and Giller (1963); Short (1982)

Picinae: Melanerpini Melanerpes hoffmannii Melanerpes rubricapillus McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Melanerpini Sphyrapicus nuchalis Sphyrapicus ruber Howell (1952); McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Shunk (2005)

Picinae: Melanerpini Sphyrapicus nuchalis Sphyrapicus thyroideus McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Short and Morony (1970)

Picinae: Melanerpini Sphyrapicus nuchalis Sphyrapicus varius McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Shunk (2005)

Picinae: Melanerpini Sphyrapicus ruber Sphyrapicus varius McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Shunk (2005)

Picinae: Campethera abingoni Campethera mombassica McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:4 Picinae: Campethera bennettii Campethera nubica McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Campethera cailliautii Campethera maculosa McCarthy (2006); Short (1982) Campetherini

Picinae: Campethera nubica Campethera punctuligera McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendropicos fuscescens Dendropicos namaquus McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendropicos gabonensis Dendropicos lugubris McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendropicos goertae Dendropicos griseocephalus McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendropicos goertae Dendropicos spodocephalus McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendropicos Dendropicos spodocephalus McCarthy (2006) Campetherini griseocephalus

Picinae: Dendrocopos assimilis Dendrocopos syriacus McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Vaurie (1959) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendrocopos leucopterus Dendrocopos major McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Vaurie (1959) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendrocopos leucotos Dendrocopos major McCarthy (2006); Short (1982) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendrocopos major Dendrocopos medius McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Dendrocopos major Dendrocopos syriacus Bauer (1957); McCarthy (2006); Short (1982); Campetherini Winkler (1971)

Picinae: Picoides arizonae Picoides stricklandi McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Picoides borealis Picoides villosus McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Picoides nuttallii Picoides pubescens McCarthy (2006); Short (1971); Short (1982) Campetherini

Picinae: Picoides nuttallii Picoides scalaris McCarthy (2006); Short (1971); Short (1982) Campetherini

Picinae: Picoides pubescens Picoides scalaris McCarthy (2006) Campetherini

Picinae: Picoides scalaris Picoides villosus McCarthy (2006); Miller (1955); Short (1971); Campetherini Short (1982)

Picinae: Colaptini Veniliornis frontalis Veniliornis passerinus McCarthy (2006); Short (1982)

Picinae: Colaptini Celeus castaneus Colaptes rubiginosus McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Colaptini Celeus elegans Celeus flavescens McCarthy (2006)

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:5 Picinae: Colaptini Celeus elegans Celeus lugubris McCarthy (2006); Short (1972); Short (1982)

Picinae: Colaptini Celeus flavescens Celeus lugubris McCarthy (2006); Short (1972); Short (1982)

Picinae: Colaptini Celeus grammicus Celeus undatus McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Colaptini Colaptes auratus Colaptes chrysoides Gray (1958); but see McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Colaptini Colaptes auratus cafer Colaptes chrysoides Gray (1958); McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Colaptini / Colaptes chrysoides Melanerpes uropygialis McCarthy (2006) Melanerpini

Picinae: Colaptini Piculus leucolaemus or Piculus simplex McCarthy (2006) Piculus litae

Picinae: Dryocopus lineatus Dryocopus schulzi McCarthy (2006); Short (1982) Campephilini

Picinae: Picini Dinopium javanense Dinopium shorii McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Picini Gecinulus grantia Gecinulus viridis McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Picini Picus canus Picus viridis Gray (1958); McCarthy (2006); Ruge (1966); Salomonsen (1947); Short (1982)

Picinae: Picini Picus vaillantii Picus viridis McCarthy (2006)

Picinae: Picini Picus viridanus Picus vittatus McCarthy (2006)

and Sphyrapicus ruber in central British Columbia (McCarthy 2006, pp.105-106). Dendropicos griseocephalus is also known 2006, p.110; Short 1982, p.176; Shunk 2005). to hybridize with the Gray-headed Woodpecker (Dendropicos Campetherini. The (Campethera spodocephalus) in northern (McCarthy 2006, p.106). maculosa) and the Green-backed Woodpecker (Campethera A hybrid between Dendropicos goertae and Dendropicos cailliautii) have overlapping ranges in West Africa and one spodocephalus has also been described from western immature female observed in Aburi, Ghana, has been interpreted (McCarthy 2006, p.106). McCarthy (2006, p.105) suggests that as a hybrid (McCarthy 2006, p.103; Short 1982, p.200). Stierling’s Woodpecker (Dendropicos stierlingi) may be a hybrid Hybridization has also been reported between the Golden- product of the (Dendropicos fuscescens) tailed Woodpecker (Campethera abingoni) and the Mombasa and the (Dendropicos namaquus). Woodpecker (Campethera mombassica) in eastern Tanzania The (Dendrocopos assimilis) occasionally (McCarthy 2006, p.102). Morphologically and geographically hybridizes with the (Dendrocopos syriacus) intermediate populations also suggest hybridization between in eastern Iran (McCarthy 2006, p.104; Short 1982, p.275; Vaurie the (Campethera nubica) and Bennett’s 1959). Extensive hybridization also occurs between Dendrocopos Woodpecker (Campethera bennettii) in eastern Africa and syriacus and the (Dendrocopos major) between Campethera nubica and the Fine-spotted Woodpecker in eastern (Bauer 1957; McCarthy 2006, p.105; Short (Campethera punctuligera) in southern (McCarthy 2006, 1982, p.279; Winkler 1971). Dendrocopos major interbreeds with p.103). the White-winged Woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucopterus) in Hybridization has been reported between the parts of northwestern China (McCarthy 2006, p.105; Short 1982, (Dendropicos gabonensis) and the p.281; Vaurie 1959, pp.8-9, 12-13) and with the White-backed (Dendropicos lugubris) in southwestern Nigeria, and the Gray Woodpecker (Dendrocopos leucotos) in Sweden (McCarthy 2006, Woodpecker (Dendropicos goertae) and the p.105; Short 1982, p.270). Older reports suggested hybridization (Dendropicos griseocephalus) in and (McCarthy between Dendrocopos major and the Middle Spotted Woodpecker

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:6 (Dendrocopos medius) (McCarthy 2006, p.105). Short 1982, p.412). Extensive hybridization occurs between the Arizona Picini. The Gray-faced Woodpecker (Picus canus) is thought to Woodpecker (Picoides arizonae) and Strickland’s Woodpecker have hybridized sporadically with the Green Woodpecker (Picus (Picoides stricklandi) in northwestern Mexico (McCarthy 2006, viridis) in eastern Europe and western Russia (Gray 1958, p.186; p.107). A specimen from Sierra del Carmen, northern Mexico, is McCarthy 2006, p.109; Ruge 1966; Salomonsen 1947; Short thought to be a hybrid between the Red-cockaded Woodpecker 1982, pp.479-480, 486-487). The Streak-breasted Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and the (Picoides villosus) (Picus viridanus) extensively hybridizes with the Laced (McCarthy 2006, p.107). Nuttall’s Woodpecker (Picoides Woodpecker (Picus vittatus) in Myanmar and western Thailand nuttallii) is known to hybridize with the (McCarthy 2006, p.109). Morphologically and geographically (Picoides pubescens) in (McCarthy 2006, p.107; Short intermediate populations indicate that hybridization is occurring 1971; Short 1982, pp.301, 307) and occasionally with the Ladder- between Levaillant’s Woodpecker (Picus vaillantii) and Picus backed Woodpecker (Picoides scalaris) in southern California viridis in the Iberian Peninsula and between the Pale-headed and northern Baja California (McCarthy 2006, pp.107-108; Short Woodpecker (Gecinulus grantia) and the Woodpecker 1971; Short 1982, pp.296, 300). McCarthy (2006, p.108) also (Gecinulus viridis) in (McCarthy 2006, p.106). records hybridization between Picoides pubescens and Picoides A probable hybrid specimen in the suggests scalaris in Texas. Interbreeding between Picoides scalaris and that interbreeding between the Common (Dinopium Picoides villosus has also been documented (McCarthy 2006, javanense) and the (Dinopium shorii) is p.108; Miller 1955; Short 1971, p.62; Short 1982, pp.325-326). occurring in Myanmar (McCarthy 2006, p.106). Colaptini. There is some evidence that the (Veniliornis passerinus) hybridizes with the Dot-fronted Baraminic Distance Correlation Analysis Woodpecker (Veniliornis frontalis) in Bolivia and northwestern Argentina (McCarthy 2006, p.110; Short 1982, p.350). To further clarify the baraminic status of the picids, I constructed Morphologically and geographically intermediate populations a character matrix using the data in Table 1 of Swierczewski indicate possible hybridization between the Rufous-winged and Raikow (1981). The dataset consisted of 50 morphological Woodpecker (Piculus simplex) and the White-throated characters (mostly related to hind limb musculature) for 20 taxa. Woodpecker (Piculus leucolaemus) or the Twelve of the taxa were picids, representing eight of the nine (Piculus litae) (McCarthy 2006, pt108). The Chestnut tribes within the family. Eight were outgroup taxa consisting of Woodpecker (Celeus elegans) has hybridized with the Pale- barbets, toucans, toucanets and honeyguides, members of the crested Woodpecker (Celeus lugubris) in Mato Grosso, Brazil Piciformes traditionally thought to be most closely related to the (McCarthy 2006, p.103; Short 1972; Short 1982, pp.400, 402). Picidae. The puffbirds and jacamars, for which Swierczewski Two possible hybrids between Celeus lugubris and the Blond- and Raikow (1981) also provided data, were excluded from crested Woodpecker (Celeus flavescens) have also been described the analysis. Musculoskeletal characters suggest that these taxa in the literature (McCarthy 2006, p.103; Short 1972; Short 1982, should be placed in a separate suborder and are more distantly p.402). Putative hybrids of Celeus elegans and Celeus flavescens related to the picids (Short 1982, p.7; Simpson and Cracraft 1981; have been reported from northeastern Brazil (McCarthy 2006, Swierczewski and Raikow 1981; Winkler et al. 1995, p.6). p.103). An intermediate specimen from the Caura River region, BDISTMDS version 2.0 was used to carry out a baraminic , suggests hybridization between the Scale-breasted distance correlation (BDC) analysis on this dataset (Wood 2008). Woodpecker (Celeus grammicus) and the Baraminic distance is the percentage of character states that two (Celeus undatus) (McCarthy 2006, p.103). organisms have in common (Robinson and Cavanaugh, 1998). Hybrids have also been reported between the Northern (Red- The BDC correlates the distances between taxa using linear shafted) Flicker (Colaptes auratus cafer) and the regression to derive a statistical significance of the similarity of (Colaptes chrysoides) (Gray 1958, p.185; McCarthy 2006, p.104). two organisms. Ideally, baraminologists hope to identify well- An older report of a natural hybrid between the Northern (Yellow- defined groups of taxa that are united by significant, positive shafted) Flicker (Colaptes auratus) and Colaptes chrysoides correlation (interpreted as evidence of continuity) and separated mentioned by Gray (1958, p.185) is regarded as dubious by from the outgroup taxa by significant, negative correlation McCarthy (2006, p.104). (interpreted as evidence of discontinuity). There are two reports of intergeneric hybrids involving The baraminic distance correlation results are summarized members of the Colaptini. The first concerns the hybridization in Figure 1. Two well-defined groups of taxa are evident. One in captivity of the Gilded Flicker (Colaptes chrysoides) with the comprises the outgroup taxa minus the honeyguide Indicator. Gila Woodpecker (Melanerpes uropygialis) (McCarthy 2006, The other well-defined group comprises the woodpeckers, p.104). The other is an instance of natural hybridization in Mexico wrynecks and piculets. Jynx does not correlate positively with between the Chestnut-colored Woodpecker (Celeus castaneus) Chrysocolaptes or Picoides, but nor is it negatively correlated and the Golden-olive Woodpecker (Colaptes rubiginosus) with them; otherwise, all the Picidae are positively correlated with (McCarthy 2006, p.103). one another. Jynx and Picumnus/Nesoctites are not negatively Campephilini. The Black-bodied Woodpecker (Dryocopus correlated with the outgroup taxa, but nor are they positively schulzi) overlaps with the (Dryocopus correlated with them; otherwise, the Picidae is surrounded by lineatus) in parts of , Argentina and Bolivia and hybrids significant negative correlation. Indicator stands alone, neither are represented in museum collections (McCarthy 2006, p.106; positively nor negatively correlated with the other taxa, with the

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:7 writes concerning the flicker: Think of the insurmountable problems this bird poses for evolutionists. They would need to start their evolutionary speculations with a normal bird like a robin. Think how many millions of robins would need to have bashed their brains out trying to play jackhammer before, not just one, but a pair of them accidentally and gradually mutated a tongue like that. Even if two were lucky enough to come up with the right tongue, it would have been of no adaptive advantage without the other features. Likewise, Parker (1994, p.58) concludes, “The woodpecker is a marvel of interdependent parts or ‘compound traits’ – traits that depend on one another for any to have survival value.” Juhasz (1995-1996, p.13) states the argument succinctly: “Nothing works Figure 1. Baraminic distance correlation for the here until everything works.” However, the baraminological analysis that I have presented woodpecker dataset of Swierczewski and Raikow in this paper weakens this argument considerably. Together, the (1981). Taxa with significant (p<0.05) positive woodpeckers, wrynecks and piculets form a good group united correlation are indicated as filled squares. Taxa with by significant positive correlation (continuity) and surrounded significant (p<0.05) negative correlation are indicated by significant negative correlation (discontinuity). Thus, we may as open circles. Swierczewski and Raikow treated tentatively identify all the woodpeckers, wrynecks and piculets as members of a single holobaramin, a conclusion that is consistent Melanerpes carolinus and Melanerpes aurifrons as with creationist claims that the holobaramin approximates the members of invalid genus Centurus, which is now family (Wood and Murray 2003, pp.71-72). Some additional recognized as a junior of Melanerpes. confirmation is provided by the strong support for the monophyly of the Picidae in recent molecular phylogenetic analyses using 12S ribosomal RNA, cytochrome b and cytochrome oxidase c sole exception of Picoides, with which it is negatively correlated. subunit 1 nucleotide sequences (Webb and Moore 2005). This is Classical multidimensional scaling (MDS) was also applied to highly significant because not all members of the Picidae possess the baraminic distances following the recommendation of Wood the combination of traits that is described in most creationist (2005a). The results are shown in Figure 2. There is an apparently presentations of the woodpecker design argument. The and orthogonal clustering, with ingroup taxa arranged on one axis and bills of woodpeckers vary considerably, for instance, and not all outgroup taxa on another. Orthogonal taxic patterns have been are equally specialised for hammering (Burt 1930). More wood- observed in other baraminological studies and have tended to pecking species tend to have straighter, broader and more chisel- mitigate conclusions of negative discontinuity (e.g. in sulids and shaped bills (Short 1982, p.17); other species have narrower and phalacrocoracids; see Wood 2005b, pp.133-146). However, in more pointed bills. In some instances, the nostrils are covered by this case repeating the BDC analysis without the genus Indicator, feathers to keep out sawdust and wood chips, but the nostrils are which formed one of the axes of the orthogonal MDS structure, exposed or only partly covered in the wrynecks and members of did not change the negative BDC between the picid and non-picid the genus Celeus (Short 1982, p.17; Winkler et al. 1995, pp.10- taxa (data not shown). This suggests that the negative BDC cannot 12). The length of the tongue also exhibits marked variation. be explained simply as an artefact of the orthogonal structure of Woodpeckers that probe crevices tend to have longer tongues the MDS. Given these results, I provisionally propose that the while those that excavate for larvae typically have shorter Picidae constitutes a holobaramin, although it must be noted that tongues (Winkler et al. 1995, p.18). Furthermore, the tip of the the dataset used in the analysis is not very holistic, being based tongue may be smooth (as in wrynecks), brush-like (as in some almost exclusively on hind limb musculature. sap-sucking species) or barbed (as in flickers) (Winkler et al. 1995, pp.18-19). In more arboreal woodpeckers, the tail is typically stiff Discussion and used to brace the bird against the climbing surface, but in piculets the tail is not used as a prop at all (Winkler et al. 1995, Creationists have typically appealed to the woodpeckers as p.16). True woodpeckers typically have the ectropodactylous an example of “irreducible complexity” at the anatomical level foot, but wrynecks have a zygodactylous foot similar to non-picid (Sunderland 1976; Morris and Parker 1982, pp.50-51; Bliss 1985; piciforms. The number of toes also varies, with the hallux absent Parker 1994, pp.56-59; Juhasz 1995-1996). Attention is commonly in the genera Sasia, Dinopium, Picoides and Gecinulus (Short drawn to the suite of characters that permits woodpeckers to 1982, p.17). Behaviour also varies greatly. While piculets and true function as living “jackhammers” – the long, retractable and sticky woodpeckers excavate holes for roosting and breeding, wrynecks tongue, the tough , the nostrils covered in feathers, the strong exploit natural cavities and existing holes (Winkler et al. 1995, neck muscles, the thick skull, the stiff tail, the ectropodactylous p.10). foot – and this unique morphology is presented as a challenge The holobaraminic status of the Picidae is consistent with to incremental . For example, Sunderland (1976, p.183) the reports of extensive hybridization documented within the

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:8 anatomical and behavioural variation, there is evidently a need to rethink the argument that the complete suite of traits seen in the most specialized woodpeckers is necessary for survival. It seems probable that at least some of the traits we associate with the true woodpeckers were not present in the ancestral form. In our present state of knowledge we can only speculate about how this intrabaraminic variation arose. I propose that mediated design during intrabaraminic diversification is likely to provide the answer. Mediated design refers to the appearance of designed, though originally latent, traits by some process of biological change (Wood 2003). In particular, this hypothesis is likely to help creationists explain the origin of woodpecker traits that are associated with insectivory, presumably something that arose subsequent to God’s curse on creation as a result of Adam’s sin (Genesis 3). This episode of diversification occurred most probably after the Flood. My review of the fossil data shows that picids have a very patchy palaeontological record, but the known are all post-Cretaceous (and therefore post-Flood) in age, assuming a Flood/post-Flood boundary at or near the Cretaceous/ Palaeogene boundary (Austin et al. 1994; Whitmore and Garner 2008). Further discoveries of fossil picids and more detailed baraminological studies may yield further intriguing insights into the phylogenetic history and post-Flood diversification of the group.

Acknowledgments

My thanks are due to Todd Wood for his assistance with the multidimensional scaling and to anonymous reviewers for their help in making this a much better paper.

References

Figure 2. Three-dimensional classical scaling applied Austin, S.A., J.R. Baumgardner, D.R. Humphreys, A.A. Snelling, L. Vardiman and K. Wise. 1994. Catastrophic plate to woodpecker baraminic distances. Two perspectives tectonics: a global Flood model of earth history. In: Walsh, of the clustering are shown, illustrating the orthogonal R.E., ed. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on pattern of taxic relationships. Red indicates the Creationism. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, pp.609- Jynginae, green the Picumninae, blue the Picinae. Grey 621. indicates the barbets and black the toucans, toucanets, Bachofen-Echt, A. 1949. Der Bernstein und Seine Einschlüsse. Springer-Verlag, Wien. and honeyguides. Stress at three dimensions is 0.118; Bauer, K. 1957. Zur systematischen Stellung des Blutspechtes. minimal stress of 0.045 occurs at seven dimensions. Johann Friedrich Naumann-Ehrung, Deutschen Kulturbund, Leipzig. Benton, M., ed. 1993. The Fossil Record 2. Chapman and Hall, Picidae. Although no confirmed hybrids have involved members London. of the Jyngini, Nesoctitini or Meiglyptini, the hybridization data Bliss, R.B. 1985. The Strange Case of the Woodpecker. Master minimally suggests that the following genera are monobaraminic: Books Video, Colorado Springs. Campethera, Celeus, Colaptes, Dendrocopos, Dendropicos, Bock, W.J. 1964. Kinetics of the avian skull. Journal of Dryocopus, Melanerpes, Picoides, Picumnus, Picus, Sphyrapicus, Morphology 114:1-42. and Veniliornis. The genera Dinopium, Gecinulus, Piculus, Bock, W.J. 1966. An approach to the functional analysis of bill and Sasia may also represent monobaramins. Furthermore, shape. Auk 83:10-51. hybridization between Colaptes chrysoides and Melanerpes Bock, W.J. 1999a. Functional and evolutionary morphology of uropygialis and between Celeus castaneus and Colaptes woodpeckers. Ostrich 70:23-31. rubiginosus suggests the potential for intergeneric and even Bock, W.J. 1999b. Cranial kinesis revisited. Zoologische Anzeiger intertribal hybridization. 238:27-39. Since all members of the Picidae probably constitute a Bock, W.J. and W.D. Miller. 1959. The scansorial foot of the holobaramin, and since the group displays a broad continuum of woodpeckers, with comments on the evolution of perching and

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:9 climbing feet in birds. American Museum Novitates No. 1931. Creation-Life Publishers, Inc., San Diego, California. Bock, W. and L.L. Short. 1972. Possible hybrid Jynx ruficollis. Olson, S.L. 1985. The fossil record of birds. In: Farner, D.S., Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 92:28-31. J.R. King and K.C. Parkes, eds. Avian Biology. Volume VIII. Brodkorb, P. 1959. Pleistocene birds from New Providence , Academic Press, London, pp.79-256. Bahamas. Bulletin of the Florida State Museum 4:349-371. Paley, W. 1826. Natural Theology; or, Evidences of the existence Burt, W.H. 1930. Adaptive modifications in the woodpeckers. and attributes of the Deity, collected from the appearances of University of California Publications in Zoology 32:455-524. Nature: Volume 1. J. Vincent, Oxford. Clements, J.F., T.S. Schulenberg, M.J. Iliff, B.L. Sullivan, C.L. Parker, G. 1994. Creation: Facts of Life. Master Books, Green Wood and D. Roberson. 2012. The eBird/Clements checklist of Forest, Arkansas. birds of the world: Version 6.7. Downloaded from http://www. Poinar, G.O., Jr. 1992. Life in Amber. Stanford University Press, birds.cornell.edu/clementschecklist/downloadable-clements- Stanford, California. checklist Ray, J. 1722. The Wisdom of God Manifested in the Works of the Cracraft, J. and J.J. Morony, Jr. 1969. A new Pliocene woodpecker, Creation, 8th ed. William and John Innys, London. with comments on the fossil Picidae. American Museum Robinson, D.A. and D.P. Cavanaugh. 1998. A quantitative Novitates 2400:1-8. approach to baraminology with examples from the primates. Darwin, C. 1968 [1859]. The Origin of Species. Penguin Books, CRSQ 34:196-208. London. Ruge, K. 1966. Mischpaar von Grünspecht und Grauspecht. Depéret, C. 1887. Recherches sur la succession des faunes de Journal für Ornithologie 107:357. vertebres de la Vallee du Rhone. Archives du Muséum Salomonsen, F. 1947. En hybrid mellem Grønspætte (Picus v. d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon 4:45-313. viridis L.) og Graaspætte (Picus c. canus Gm.). Vår Fågelvärld Desfayes, M. 1969. A possible hybrid Jynx ruficollis x torquilla. 6:141-144. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club 89:110-112. Schwab, I.R. 2002. Cure for a headache. British Journal of Feduccia, J.A. and R.L. Wilson. 1967. Avian fossils from the Ophthalmology 86:843. Lower Pliocene of Kansas. Occasional Papers of the Museum Selander, R.K. and D.R. Giller. 1963. Species limits in the of Zoology, University of Michigan 655:1-6. woodpecker genus Centurus (Aves). Bulletin of the American Gibson, L.J. 2006. Woodpecker pecking: how woodpeckers avoid Museum of Natural History 124:213-274. brain injury. Journal of Zoology 270:462-465. Short, L.L. 1971. Systematics and behavior of some North Gray, A.P. 1958. Bird Hybrids: A Check-List with Bibliography. American woodpeckers, genus Picoides (Aves). Bulletin of the Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal, American Museum of Natural History 145:1-118. Buckinghamshire, England. Short, L.L. 1972. Relationships among the four species of Howell, T.R. 1952. Natural history and differentiation in the the superspecies Celeus elegans (Aves, Picidae). American Yellow-bellied Sapsucker. Condor 54:237-282. Museum Novitates No. 2487. Juhasz, D. 1995-1996. The incredible woodpecker. Creation Ex Short, L.L. 1982. Woodpeckers of the World. Delaware Museum Nihilo 18(1):10-13. of Natural History Monograph Series Number 4, Greenville, Lambrecht, K. 1933. Handbuch der Palaeornithologie. Verlag Delaware. Von Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin. Short, L.L. and J.J. Morony, Jr. 1970. A second hybrid Laybourne, R.C., D.W. Deedrick and F.M. Hueber. 1994. Feather Williamson’s x Red-naped Sapsucker and an evolutionary in amber is earliest fossil of Picidae. Wilson Bulletin history of . Condor 72:310-315. 106:18-25. Shufeldt, R.W. 1915. Fossil birds in the Marsh Collection of Yale Marsh, O.C. 1872. Notice of some new Tertiary and post-Tertiary University. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts birds. American Journal of Science 4(3):256-262. and Sciences 19:1-110. May, P.R.A., J.M. Fuster, J. Haber and A. Hirschman. 1979. Shunk, S.A. 2005. Sphyrapicus anxiety: identifying hybrid Woodpecker drilling behaviour: an endorsement of the sapsuckers. Birding 37(3):288-298. rotational theory of impact brain injury. Archives of Neurology Simpson, S.F. and J. Cracraft. 1981. The phylogenetic relationships 36:370-373. of the Piciformes ( Aves). Auk 98:481-494. McCarthy, E.M. 2006. Handbook of Avian Hybrids of the World. Sunderland, L.D. 1976. Miraculous design features in Oxford University Press, Oxford. woodpeckers. CRSQ 12(4):183. Miller, A.H. 1955. A hybrid woodpecker and its significance in Swierczewski, E.V. and R.J. Raikow. 1981. Hind limb morphology, speciation in the genus Dendrocopos. Evolution 9:317-321. phylogeny, and classification of the Piciformes. Auk 98:466- Milne-Edwards, M.A. 1867-1871. Recherches Anatomiques et 480. Paleontologiques pour servir a l’Histoire des Oiseaux Fossiles Vaurie, C. 1959. Systematic notes on Palearctic birds, No. 35: de la France, 2 vols. Paris. Picidae: The genus Dendrocopos (Part I). American Museum Mlíkovský, J. 2002. Cenozoic Birds of the World. Part 1: Europe. Novitates No. 1946. Ninox Press, Praha, Czech Republic. Webb, D.M. and W.S. Moore. 2005. A phylogenetic analysis Monroe, B.L., Jr. 1968. A Distributional Survey of the Birds of woodpeckers and their allies using 12s, Cyt b, and COI of Honduras. Ornithological Monographs No.7, American nucleotide sequences (class Aves; order Piciformes). Molecular Ornithologists’ Union. Phylogenetics and Evolution 36:233-248. Morris, H.M. and G.E. Parker. 1982. What Is Creation Science? Wetmore, A. 1951. The original description of the fossil bird

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:10 Cryptornis antiquus. Condor 53:153. Guide to the Woodpeckers, Piculets and Wrynecks of the World. Whitmore, J.H. and P. Garner. 2008. Using suites of criteria to Pica Press, Sussex. recognize pre-Flood, Flood, and post-Flood strata in the rock Wood, T.C. 2003. Mediated design. Impact 363:i-iv. record with application to Wyoming (USA). In: A.A. Snelling, Wood, T.C. 2005a. Visualizing baraminic distances using classical ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on multidimensional scaling. Origins 57:9-29. Creationism. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh and Wood, T.C. 2005b. A creationist review and preliminary analysis Institute for Creation Research, Dallas, pp.425-448. of the history, geology, climate, and biology of the Galápagos Wilson, E.O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. Penguin Books, London. Islands. CORE Issues in Creation 1:1-241. Winkler, H. 1971. Die artliche Isolation des Blutspechts Picoides Wood, T.C. 2008. BDISTMDS software, v. 2.0. Core Academy of (Dendrocopos) syriacus. Egretta 14:1-20. Science. Distributed by the author. Winkler, H. and W.J. Bock. 1976. Analyse der Kräfteverhältnisse Wood, T.C. and M.J. Murray. 2003. Understanding the Pattern of bei Klettervögeln. Journal für Ornithologie 117:397-418. Life: Origins and Organization of the Species. Broadman and Winkler, H., D.A. Christie, and D. Nurney. 1995. Woodpeckers: A Holman, Nashville, Tennessee.

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 4:11

Top View