National Quail Symposium Proceedings Volume 3 Article 2 1993 Taxonomy and Biogeography of New World Quail R. J. Gutierrez Humboldt State University Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/nqsp Recommended Citation Gutierrez, R. J. (1993) "Taxonomy and Biogeography of New World Quail," National Quail Symposium Proceedings: Vol. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/nqsp/vol3/iss1/2 This General is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in National Quail Symposium Proceedings by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/nqsp. Gutierrez: Taxonomy and Biogeography of New World Quail TAXONOMYAND BIOGEOGRAPHYOFNEW WORLD QUAIL R. J. GUTIERREZ,Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA 95521 Abstract: New World quail are a distinct genetic lineage within the avian order Galliformes. The most recent taxonomic treatment classifies the group as a separate family, Odontophoridae, within the order. Approximately 31 species and 128-145 subspecies are recognized from North and South America. Considerable geographic variation occurs within some species which leads to ambiguity when describing species limits. A thorough analysis of the Galliformes is needed to clarify the phylogenetic relationships of these quail. It is apparent that geologic or climatic isolating events led to speciation within New World quail. Their current distribution suggests that dispersal followed speciation. Because the genetic variation found in this group may reflect local adaption, the effect of translocation and stocking of pen-reared quail on local population genetic structure must be critically examined. Key words: biogeography, New World quail, Odontophoridae, taxonomy. Citation: Gutierrez, R. J. 1993. Taxonomy and biogeography of New World quail. Pages 8-15 in K. E. Church and T. V. Dailey, eds. Quail III: national quail symposium. Kansas Dep. Wildl. and Parks, Pratt. The New World quail are a diverse and inter­ esting group within the avian order Galliforrnes. They are distributed from Canada south to South America (Fig. l; Johnsgard 1988). The more com­ mon North American species have received much attention from ecologists because they are impor­ tant game birds (e.g., Rosene 1969, Johnsgard 1973, Leopold 1977, Scott 1985). Taxonomists also have focused on these quail because they are relatively easy to collect, and probably because of their culinary appeal. That is, early bird collectors and ornithologists often collected quail not only Number of Species because of their scientific value but also because ~ 1 of their fine taste. These collections provided ex­ tensive comparative material for taxonomists !l1! 2 working in museums (e.g., see Table 1 for a partial r--------------· mm3 I list of galliforrn taxonomic treatments). ,I Despite widespread interest in New World .4 quail, the systematics of this group are still in debate (e.g., Mayr and Short 1970, AOU 1983, Sibley and Ahlquist 1990). This dynamic state is due, in part, to recent advances in systematic techniques (e.g., Gutierrez et al. 1983, Sibley and Ahlquist 1990) as well as to debate over the species concept (Mayr and Short 1970, McKitrick and Zink 1988). Major advances in molecular genetics are providing many new insights into the phylogenetic relationships of quail and other birds (Cooke and Buckley 1987, Hillis and Moritz 1990, Sibley and Ahlquist 1990). I predict addi­ tional changes will occur in the taxonomy of New Fig. 1. Distribution and species density of New World World quail as a result of the application of these quail (after Leopold et al. 1981, Johnsgard 1988). new molecular techniques. In this paper I will discuss the most recent of these systematic and biogeographic studies to taxonomic and systematic treatments of New North American quail management. World quail (Table 2). Next I will outline some I would like to thank George Barrowclough, proposed hypotheses about quail biogeography Kevin Church, and Robert Zink for critically read­ and evolution. Finally, I will discuss the relevance ing this paper. Thomas Howell provided insight 1 National Quail Symposium Proceedings, Vol. 3 [1993], Art. 2 Taxonomy of Quail-Gutierrez 9 to the AOU's committee on nomenclature Table 1. Major taxonomic treatments of New World taxonomic treatment of the odontophorine quail. quail. TAXONOMY OF NEW WORLD Source Basis for treatment QUAIL Peters (1934) External morphology Taxonomy is the study of classifying organisms. AOU (1957) External morphology Systematics is the study of phylogenetic relation­ Holman (1961) Osteology ships and evolutionary processes that generate Brodkorb (1964) Fossil record biodiversity. The distinction is important because Hudson et al. (1966) Myology pure "alpha" level taxonomy may not be sensitive Mayr and Short (1970) External morphology to issues of phylogeny. The most interesting ques­ Sibley and Ahlquist Egg white protein tions in biology are not what an organism's name (1972) electrophoresis happens to be, but what are its ecological and Stock and Bunch (1982) Cytogenetics evolutionary relationships to other organisms Gutierrez et al. (1983) Protein electrophoresis (Brooks and McLennan 1991). Thus most current treatments of taxonomy are really systematic AOU (1983) Synopsis of literature treatments. Sibley and Ahlquist (1990) DNA-DNA hybridization Classification of Quail (Sibley and Monroe [1990]) There have been several taxonomic and sys­ tematic treatments of New World quail (fable 1). Until recently most treatments have been based cal differentiation exhibited by the New World on general morphology (i.e., plumage pattern, quail. For example, odontophorine quail are uni­ color variation, general size) and species integrity que among Galliformes by having a serrated man­ (Mayr and Short 1970). Some scientists have dible. Gutierrez et. al. (1983) also demonstrated based their inferences ofrelationship on morphol­ that the odontophorine quail were a distinct clade ogy (osteology [Holman 1961]; myology [Hudson within the Galliformes, but they did not offer a et al. 19GG]); others have based their inferences specific recommendation on the family status of on genetic analyses (protein electrophoresis the group. l\fost classification schemes place the [Gutierrez et al. 1983]; DNA hybridization [Sibley New World quail within the subfamily Odon­ and Ahlquist 1990]; see also Table 1). tophorinae without substantive comment on the Higher Taxonomi,e Levels.----All taxonomic basis for the classification (e.g., Peters 1934, Hud­ treatments of quail place them within the order son et al. 19G6, AOU 1983), although Delacour Galliformes. Sibley and Monroe's (1990) organiza­ (1951) placed them within the subfamily tion (fable 2) is somewhat different than classical Phasianinae. Despite the large number of studies approaches because they use a dichotomous clas­ on species or groups within Galliformes, there is sification which requires use of additional not a comprehensive systematic study of the en­ taxonomic levels such as "parvorder." This tire group (see Randi et al. 1991). proposed classification is considered to be a work­ Lower Ta:i:onomi,e Levels.-Many changes in ing hypothesis by the AOU committee on the taxonomy of species and subspecies of quail nomenclature (f. Howell, pers. commun.). Never­ have occurred in the past 50 years (fable 2). theless, Sibley and Monroe's approach is different Initially there was a tendency among taxonomists from other treatments because they elevate the to describe a newly collected specimen as a new New World quail to family status (i.e., Odon­ species vvhen it has morphologically differen­ tophoridae). Sibley and Ahlquist (1985, 1990) tiated from other specimens. As the biology and noted that New World quail were very distinct distribution of these species became known in from other chicken-like birds on the basis of DNA greater detail, many of the originally named hybridization experiments. The DNA hybridiza­ species were relegated to subspecific status. This tion technique (Sibley and Ahlquist 1990) upon process continues today as poorly known species which this classification was based has received in the Neotropics become known (e.g., Odon­ widespread criticism among ornithological sys­ tophoru.s). There also has been a general trend in tematists (e.g., see Lanyon 1992). ornithology to dissolve monotypic genera. The Holman (1961) suggested that New World quail recent merging of the Lophortyxquail (AOU 1957) should be distinguished as a separate family. He with Callipep/a. is an example of this trend as it based his suggestion on the significant osteologi- affects American quail. 2 Gutierrez: Taxonomy and Biogeography of New World Quail 10 Quail III Table 2. Taxonomies of New World quail. 8 Peters Howard and Moore Sibley and Monroe (1934) (1991) (1990) Parvclass Galloanserae Superorder Gallomorphae Order Galliformes Galliformes Galliformes Parvorder Odontophorida Superfamily Phasianoidea Family Phasianidae Phasianidae Odontophoridae Subfamily Odontophorinae Odontophorinae Genera Dendrortyx (4,8)b Dendrortyx (3,8) Dendrortyx (3) Oreortyx (1,3) Oreortyx (1,4) Oreortyx (1) Callipepla (1,3) Callipepla (1,4) Callipepla (4) Lophortyx (3,10) Lophortyx (3,16) Philortyx (1,1) Philortyx (1,1) Philortyx (1) Colinus (4 ,33) Colinus (3,42) Colinus (3) Odontophorus