The genus contains the following extant species: they are even elevated to full genus level, but given the conflicting data about the
basal radiation of
Zapornia, this remains conjectural for the time being. In particular the African
endemics Black crake and
Sakalava rail are the source of much uncertainty; they were considered closely related, even a
superspecies, and allied with the
Black-tailed crake when these three were still included in
Amaurornis. This assumption was not based on quantitative analyses however, but on the similar appearance of Sakalava rail and Black-tailed crake and the fact that the Sakalava rail occurs on the western coast of Madagascar while the Black crake is found on the African mainland across the
Mozambique Channel. Altogether however, the Sakalava rail remains little-known, and consequently has rarely been included in modern studies. The Black crake, meanwhile, was usually found in molecular phylogenetic analyses to be sister to the remaining species of
Zapornia as circumscribed here, but not always robustly so; one early analysis of a limited amount of
mtDNA data, causing unfounded doubts about the Brown crake's inclusion in
Zapornia. The Black crake would constitute subgenus
Limnocorax, but whether this lineage is sister to the other living
Zapornia (and thus the foremost candidate for splitting off the present genus) and/or includes the Brown crake requires further study. The Ruddy-breasted and Band-bellied crakes, on the other hand, were never considered anything but
sister species with almost
parapatric distribution; this is supported by all molecular phylogenetic studies including those two species, but their placement with regard to the Black Rail lineage is uncertain; Ruddy-breasted and Band-bellied crakes may also represent an ancient lineage of
Zapornia – perhaps even older than
Limnocorax – and warrant recognition as subgenus (or even genus)
Limnobaenus. Before the establishment of
Limnobaenus, the Ruddy-breasted crake (under its
junior synonym Rallus rubiginosus) had already been illustrated as
type species of a genus
Corethrura by
George Robert Gray in 1846; this name, confusingly, was at the same time considered by
Ludwig Reichenbach for the typical
flufftails but formally established for these only some years later, leading to its
invalidity and eventual replacement by the current name
Sarothrura. Further adding to the confusion, in the 1855 edition of his species catalogue, Gray subsumed his
Corethrura in
Rallina, with the
Red-legged crake (
R. fasciata) as type species. However, even before Gray,
Frederick William Hope had established
Corethrura as a genus of
lophopid planthoppers, and thus Gray's name was invalid too. Likewise, a close relationship between the Little and Baillon's crakes has been suggested by most if not all authors from an early date onwards, and is well supported by the molecular data too. As this group contains the genus'
type species, it would be subgenus
Zapornia, but as it contains at least some if not most of the extinct members of the genus, its circumscription is not fully resolved. almost all subsequent authors preferred to retain all the core-group species in
Zapornia. However, the Henderson and Spotless crakes (and presumably some extinct species) stand apart from the Little and Baillon's crakes, and their
clade might also include the Black-tailed crake and indeed the Sakalava rail, The other three extinct species are known from numerous (Laysan rail) or very few (the other two) specimens. In the case of the Hawaiian rail, colour differences among these specimen caused them to be assigned to two species, but more likely they are simply juvenile and adult birds of a single species. What limited
ancient DNA has been recovered from them allies the Laysan rail robustly with Baillon's and Little crakes (i.e. subgenus
Zapornia even in the most narrow circumscription) and the other two with the Spotless and Henderson crakes – which, if correct, would cause the (sub)genus
Pennula to refer to all of them if they are not included in
Zapornia. while the Hawaiian rail is so similar to the
Limnobaenus lineage that it might arguably be included in that subgenus (which would cause
Aphanolimnas to apply to the Spotless/Henderson/Kosrae crake group, if that is separated from
Zapornia sensu stricto). •
"Porzana" menehune –
Liliput crake (but see below) •
"Porzana" sp. –
Easter Island crake •
"Porzana" sp. –
Great Big Island crake •
"Porzana" sp. –
Lesser Mangaia crake – possibly subspecies of
Z. tabuensis •
"Porzana" sp. –
Malakula crake •
"Porzana" sp. –
Medium Kauai crake •
"Porzana" sp. –
Small Big Island crake – basically the
Laysan rail's equivalent from almost exactly
the other side of the world – and is officially placed in
Zapornia by several authorities today. Of the Pacific island
"Porzana" that have been
cladistically studied in a combined morphological-molecular analysis, Consequently, while the Small Maui crake is very likely a
Zapornia under all but the most extreme "
splitter" taxonomies, the Great Maui crake probably belongs to a different branch of
Zapornia, or represents a distinct lineage of
tribe Zapornini or even
subfamily Himanthornithinae. The extremely tiny
Liliput crake from
Molokaʻi directly to the west of Maui, by contrast, turns out close to
Laterallus in the combined analysis, but without obvious affiliations to any particular group of species in that genus. It might be part of a
radiation that includes
Laterallus as well as
Rufirallus and the
Ocellated crake from South America, and given that
Laterallus as traditionally circumscribed is probably
paraphyletic it might thus even belong into an expanded
Rufiralllus. Since a purely morphological cladistic analysis could not assign it (or any other prehistoric Hawaiian
"Porzana", for that matter) to any particular lineage within Himanthornithinae, the Liliput crake's apparent similarity to tribe
Laterallini might, on the other hand, simply be chance
convergence. The
Great and
Small Oʻahu crakes did not turn up anywhere near
Zapornia (nor
Porzana) in the morphological-molecular analysis, but robustly fell within the other rail subfamily
Rallinae. Therein they resolved in tribe
Rallini as well-distinct lineages within a radiation around
Gallirallus. The smaller species fell within
Hypotaenidia (which nowadays contains the bulk of the Pacific island rails formerly included in
Gallirallus), while the larger one turned out more less closely related, in a badly-resolved radiation of mid-sized to large and very often flightless species comprising numerous small genera. Remarkably, the same
phylogenetic situation also occurred on the
Chatham Islands on the opposite end of the Pacific Ocean; there, however, the more ancient lineage (
Chatham rail) evolved to diminutive size, while the
Hypotaenidia species (
Dieffenbach's rail) became more robust than its
volant ancestors. Both
Great Big Island crake and
Small Big Island crake are known from very few subfossil remains; they resemble the
Hawaiian rail but are about 10% larger/smaller in linear dimensions of their bones, which is well outside the known range of Hawaiian rail size variation. Ancient DNA was successfully extracted from the remains, which suggested a close relationship with the Hawaiian rail, the Spotless crake, and the Small Maui crake; as with the Maui rails, no data or detailed information were published. Until more individuals of the extinct rails of the Big Island of Hawaiʻi are found, the exact relationships and even the distinctness of the two unnamed species remain elusive. ==References==