Weka; two subspecies
- Neil Fitzgerald
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3651
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 10:20 am
- Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
- Contact:
Weka; two subspecies
In the NZ Herald a few days ago is an article about DNA work by Steve Trewick and others on weka, stating they should be just two subspecies; North Island (Gallirallus australis greyi) and South Island (G.a. australis). There must be a paper out there somewhere, but I haven't come across it yet.
-
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:05 am
Re: Weka; two subspecies
Its a rather interesting piece of research really. I work with Steve Pilkington one of the co-authors (who did all the research/analysis) and he said that the southern ones only differ by a single base-pair between all of the traditional sub-species, while there was a 15 base pair difference between NI and SI birds, hence the lumping to two sub-species.
Although i hope they maintain control over the chatham birds as they certainly represent a unique phenotype even if theyre not that genotypically distinct.
Although i hope they maintain control over the chatham birds as they certainly represent a unique phenotype even if theyre not that genotypically distinct.
-
- Posts: 1103
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 5:45 pm
Re: Weka; two subspecies
Interesting - a consistent difference of one base pair is still a difference and would be sufficient to justify some sort of taxonomic status I would think. I'm sure the differences are recent, probably post glacial as the plumage differences might be climate driven but as far as I know Pied and Variable Oystercatchers are not distinguished by any base pairs at all - do they get lumped?
Ian
Ian
- Michael Szabo
- Posts: 2620
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 12:30 pm
- Contact:
Re: Weka; two subspecies
Here's the link: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=11934273
'New Zealand Birders' Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/857726274293085
- David Riddell
- Posts: 963
- Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 3:46 pm
Re: Weka; two subspecies
Ian Southey wrote:Interesting - a consistent difference of one base pair is still a difference and would be sufficient to justify some sort of taxonomic status I would think. I'm sure the differences are recent, probably post glacial as the plumage differences might be climate driven but as far as I know Pied and Variable Oystercatchers are not distinguished by any base pairs at all - do they get lumped?
According to the paper abstract (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28805283), the study analysed "DNA sequences of mitochondrial genes and nuclear β-fibrinogen and five microsatellite loci" - in other words a tiny proportion of the entire weka genome. It's a virtual certainty that if the genomes of all the various weka populations are ever sequenced it will be found that they differ from one another by much more than a single base pair. There are clear differences between some of the South Island weka populations, and if this study of a strictly limited DNA subset has been unable to detect them it doesn't mean they're any less real.