A molecular phylogeny of the harriers (Circus, Accipitridae) indicate the role of long distance dispersal and migration in diversification
Abstract
The monophyly of the raptorial Circus genus (harriers) has never been in question, but the specific status of many, often vulnerable island endemic, taxa remains uncertain. Here we utilise one mitochondrial and three nuclear loci from all currently recognised Circus taxa (species and subspecies) to infer a robust phylogeny, to estimate the divergence date and to reconstruct the biogeographic origins of the Circus group. Our phylogeny supports both the monophyly of Circus and polyphyly of the genus Accipiter. Depending on the rate of molecular clock used, the emergence of the harrier clade took place between 4.9 and 12.2mya which coincides with the worldwide formation of open habitats which extant harriers now exploit. The sister relationship of the Northern Harrier C. cyaneus hudsonius and the Cinereous Harrier C. cinereus contradicts previous classifications that treated the former as conspecific with the Hen Harrier C. cyaneus cyaneus. Thus both should be elevated to species status: C. hudsonius and C. cyaneus. Further, the African Marsh C. ranivorus and the European Marsh C. aeruginosus Harriers emerge as sister species. The remaining marsh harriers exhibit very little genetic diversity, and are all recently diverged taxa that exhibit allopatric distributions. Considering their sister relationship and geographic proximity, we recommend treating C. approximans and C. spilonotus spilothorax as subspecies of C. approximans. For C. spilonotus spilonotus C. maillardi maillardi…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In one case only, 'Accipiter' species have been reclassified in a new genus after molecular data showed that they were not members of the larger Accipiter (sensu lato) clade: the Tiny Hawk and Semicollared Hawk are now placed in the genus Microspizias by some authors.
“In one case only, have”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley, 2015
Accipiter, as traditionally defined (Peters, 1931), does not form a monophyletic group.
“a wave of evidence that Accipiter, as traditionally defined (Peters, 1931), does not form a monophyletic group (e.g., Griffiths, 2007;Hugall & Stuart-Fox, 2012;Oatley et al., 2015;Mindell et al., 2018).”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley et al., 2015
In cases where the relationships of Accipiter were explicitly addressed, authors have been unwilling to take nomenclatural action because of relatively sparse species-level sampling or uncertainty caused by the exclusion of (or scarcity of available data from) certain enigmatic taxa.
“In cases where the relationships of Accipiter were explicitly addressed, authors have been unwilling to take nomenclatural action because of relatively sparse species-level sampling (e.g., Oatley et al., 2015) or uncertainty caused by the exclusion of (or scarcity of available data from) certain enigmatic taxa (Mindell et al., 2018).”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley et al., 2015
Our topology for Circus generally agreed with previous studies, except that we recovered C. assimilis (and therefore C. teauteenis) as sister to the rest of Circus, rather than sister to one of two main clades within Circus.
“In general, our topology agreed with previous studies (Oatley et al., 2015;Mindell et al., 2018;Knapp et al., 2019), with the exception of the placement of C. assimilis (and therefore C. teauteenis), which we recovered as sister to the rest of Circus, rather than sister to one of two main clades within Circus.”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley et al., 2015
The Microspizias + Harpagus clade was sister to Buteoninae.
“Like Oatley et al. (2015), we found the Microspizias + Harpagus clade to be sister to Buteoninae, whereas Mindell et al. (2018) found it to be sister to a clade containing Buteoninae and the rest of Accipitrinae (sensu lato).”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley et al. (2015)
The genus Accipiter is non-monophyletic.
“The non-monophyly of the diverse genus Accipiter is a particularly thorny problem, which has been unresolved for many years (e.g., Griffiths, 2007;Hugall & Stuart-Fox, 2012;Oatley et al., 2015;Mindell et al., 2018).”
From Enigmas no longer: using ultraconserved elements to place several unusual hawk taxa and address the non-monophyly of the genus <i>Accipiter</i> (Accipitriformes: Accipitridae) (2025) · cites this paper as Oatley et al., 2015
Cites
Consequences of Range Contractions and Range Shifts on Molecular Diversity
Arenas, M., Ray, N., Currat, M., & Excoffier, L. (2012) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msr187 · Cited by 236 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mindell, D. P., Fuchs, J., & Johnson, J. A. (2018) · Birds of Prey · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-73745-4_1 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Self-citationCatanach, T. A., Halley, M. R., & Pirro, S. (2025) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1093/biolinnean/blae028 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
- Authors
- Oatley, G., Simmons, R. E., & Fuchs, J.
- Affiliations
- Palacký University Olomouc (CZ)
- University of Cape Town (ZA)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Oatley, Graeme
- Venue
- Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-04
- Volume
- 85
- Pages
- 150-160
- ISSN
- 1055-7903 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1995542145
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 2.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- European Union Research (CZ.1.07/2.3.00/30.0004)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
- Keywords
- harriers, circus, Accipitridae, molecular phylogeny, long-distance dispersal, bird migration, speciation, divergence time estimation, biogeography, monophyly, taxonomic revision, Northern Harrier, marsh harrier, subspecies status, mitochondrial and nuclear loci
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Bayes Theorem, DNA, Mitochondrial, Biological Evolution, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Genetic Variation, Likelihood Functions, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Ecosystem, Australasia, Falconiformes, Animal Distribution
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review