Galliformes

Abstract: Hybridisation and introgression play key roles in the evolutionary history of animal species. They are commonly observed within several orders in wild birds. The domestic chicken Gallus gallus domesticus is the most common livestock species. More than 65 billion chickens are raised annually to produce meat and 80 million metric tons of egg for global human consumption by the commercial sector. Unravelling the origin of its genetic diversity has major application for sustainable breeding improvement programmes. In this study, we report genome-wide analyses for signatures of introgression between indigenous domestic village chicken and the four wild Gallus species. We first assess the genome-wide phylogeny and divergence time across the genus Gallus. Genome-wide sequence divergence analysis supports a sister relationship between the Grey junglefowl G. sonneratii and Ceylon junglefowl G. lafayettii. Both species form a clade that is sister to the Red junglefowl G. gallus, with the Green junglefowl G. varius the most ancient lineage within the genus. We reveal extensive bidirectional introgression between the Grey junglefowl and the domestic chicken and to a much lesser extent with the Ceylon junglefowl. We identify a single case of Green junglefowl introgression. These introgressed regions include genes with biological functions related to development and immune system. Our study shows that while the Red junglefowl is the main ancestral species, introgressive hybridisation episodes have impacted the genome and contributed to the diversity of the domestic chicken, although likely at different levels across its geographic range.

Abstract: SUMMARY The electrophcrctic profiles of the egg-white proteins of 359 species of non-passerines and at least 300 species of passerines have been studied. This paper is concerned primarily with the non-passerines. Protein structure is genetically determined and tends to be phylogenetically more conservative than most other characters used in taxonomy. The electrophoretic profiles provide an index to some aspects of protein structure and hence to phylogenetic relationships. The present technique is described and his been found to be most informative at the generic, familial and ordinal levels. Individual variation, variation among morphological “breeds” of Domestic Fowl, and variation within species, genera, families and orders have been taken into account in the comparisons. The principal conclusions are as follows: 1. The Struthioniformes and Casuariiformes arc probably related but the relationships of these to the Rheiformes are uncertain. 2. The Tinamiformes do not seem to be related to the Rheiformes or to the Galliformes. 3. The Pelecaniformes may be polyphyletic but this is uncertain. 4. The three available species of Sula have remarkably different egg-white profiles. The significance of these differences is not known. 5. Anhinga and Phalacrocorax are closely related and may be included in the same subfamily. 6. The Flamingos are related to the Ciconiiformes, not to the Anseriformes. 7. The Gaviiformes seem to be more closely related to the Charadriiformes than to any other group. 8. The Aramiclae are closer to the Rallidae than to the Gruidae. 9. The Gruiformes are probably polyphyletic. There is no evidence that Eurypyga or Psophia are closely related to the Gruidae, the Rallidae or each other. 10. The Gallrormes (Opisthocomus not studied) are a very close-knit monophyletic group. The order is divided into three families, Megapodiidac, Phasianidae, Opisthocomidae. As subfamilies of tht Phasianidae: Phasianinae, Meleagridinae, Numidinae, Tetraoninae, Cracinae. 11. The Anat dae are also monophyletic and closely related. Anseranas seems sufficiently distinctive to be placed in a monotypic tribe or possibly given subfamily status. 12. The Falconiformes- may be polyphyletic, the Falconidae possibly being unrelated to the other diurnal birds of prey. The Cathartidae are related to the Accipitridae. 13. The Strigiformes and Caprimulgiformes are related. 14. Turacos (Musophagidae) are cuculiform, apparently related to the Cuculidae through Centropus. 15. Merops, Momotus and the Alcedinidae are related to one another but seem unrelated to Eurystomus (Coraciidae). The Coraciiformes are therefore probably polyphyletic. 16. The genus Columba is probably polyphyletic, the Old World species being distinct from the New World species. 17. The Coliilormes and Trogoniformes are each distinctive and have no close relatives. Both may be related to the Passeriformes. 18. The swifts and hummingbirds are related to one another and possibly to the Passeriformes. 19. A request for help in obtaining additional material is made and instructions for collection and shipment art given.

Abstract: SUMMARY The electrophcrctic profiles of the egg-white proteins of 359 species of non-passerines and at least 300 species of passerines have been studied. This paper is concerned primarily with the non-passerines. Protein structure is genetically determined and tends to be phylogenetically more conservative than most other characters used in taxonomy. The electrophoretic profiles provide an index to some aspects of protein structure and hence to phylogenetic relationships. The present technique is described and his been found to be most informative at the generic, familial and ordinal levels. Individual variation, variation among morphological “breeds” of Domestic Fowl, and variation within species, genera, families and orders have been taken into account in the comparisons. The principal conclusions are as follows: 1. The Struthioniformes and Casuariiformes arc probably related but the relationships of these to the Rheiformes are uncertain. 2. The Tinamiformes do not seem to be related to the Rheiformes or to the Galliformes. 3. The Pelecaniformes may be polyphyletic but this is uncertain. 4. The three available species of Sula have remarkably different egg-white profiles. The significance of these differences is not known. 5. Anhinga and Phalacrocorax are closely related and may be included in the same subfamily. 6. The Flamingos are related to the Ciconiiformes, not to the Anseriformes. 7. The Gaviiformes seem to be more closely related to the Charadriiformes than to any other group. 8. The Aramiclae are closer to the Rallidae than to the Gruidae. 9. The Gruiformes are probably polyphyletic. There is no evidence that Eurypyga or Psophia are closely related to the Gruidae, the Rallidae or each other. 10. The Gallrormes (Opisthocomus not studied) are a very close-knit monophyletic group. The order is divided into three families, Megapodiidac, Phasianidae, Opisthocomidae. As subfamilies of tht Phasianidae: Phasianinae, Meleagridinae, Numidinae, Tetraoninae, Cracinae. 11. The Anat dae are also monophyletic and closely related. Anseranas seems sufficiently distinctive to be placed in a monotypic tribe or possibly given subfamily status. 12. The Falconiformes- may be polyphyletic, the Falconidae possibly being unrelated to the other diurnal birds of prey. The Cathartidae are related to the Accipitridae. 13. The Strigiformes and Caprimulgiformes are related. 14. Turacos (Musophagidae) are cuculiform, apparently related to the Cuculidae through Centropus. 15. Merops, Momotus and the Alcedinidae are related to one another but seem unrelated to Eurystomus (Coraciidae). The Coraciiformes are therefore probably polyphyletic. 16. The genus Columba is probably polyphyletic, the Old World species being distinct from the New World species. 17. The Coliilormes and Trogoniformes are each distinctive and have no close relatives. Both may be related to the Passeriformes. 18. The swifts and hummingbirds are related to one another and possibly to the Passeriformes. 19. A request for help in obtaining additional material is made and instructions for collection and shipment art given.