MolluscaBase name details
Bourguignatia Brusina, 1884 †
1616963 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1616963)
uncertain > taxon inquirendum
Genus
Bourguignatia acranica Brusina, 1884 † (type by monotypy)
- Species Bourguignatia acranica Brusina, 1884 † (uncertain > taxon inquirendum)
fossil only
feminine
Brusina, S. (1884). Die Neritodonta Dalmatiens und Slavoniens nebst allerlei malakologischen Bemerkungen. Jahrbücher der Deutschen Malakozoologischen Gesellschaft. 11, 17-120., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16288956
page(s): 72 [details]
page(s): 72 [details]
Status Apparently this taxon was not seriously proposed by Brusina (1884), who discussed at length the issue of splitting the...
Status Apparently this taxon was not seriously proposed by Brusina (1884), who discussed at length the issue of splitting the Dalmatian Miocene Theodoxus into numerous species, sections, subgenera and genera as done by Bourguignat. On the specific case of an non-sculptured morphotype in an otherwise sculptured taxon, he wrote (rather sarcastically it seems) "one creates just as well for this unkeeled Neritine also a new genus e.g. Bourguignatia acranica". The name is linked to a short description and therefore available, but it is not used in the following literature, not even by Brusina himself in his following monographs. The unsculptured morphotype was considered to belong to Theodoxus imbricatus (Brusina, 1878) by Neubauer et al. (2016), without referring to Bourguignatia though. [details]
MolluscaBase eds. (2025). MolluscaBase. Bourguignatia Brusina, 1884 †. Accessed at: https://www.molluscabase.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1616963 on 2025-09-10
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Brusina, S. (1884). Die Neritodonta Dalmatiens und Slavoniens nebst allerlei malakologischen Bemerkungen. Jahrbücher der Deutschen Malakozoologischen Gesellschaft. 11, 17-120., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16288956
page(s): 72 [details]
page(s): 72 [details]
From editor or global species database
Status Apparently this taxon was not seriously proposed by Brusina (1884), who discussed at length the issue of splitting the Dalmatian Miocene Theodoxus into numerous species, sections, subgenera and genera as done by Bourguignat. On the specific case of an non-sculptured morphotype in an otherwise sculptured taxon, he wrote (rather sarcastically it seems) "one creates just as well for this unkeeled Neritine also a new genus e.g. Bourguignatia acranica". The name is linked to a short description and therefore available, but it is not used in the following literature, not even by Brusina himself in his following monographs. The unsculptured morphotype was considered to belong to Theodoxus imbricatus (Brusina, 1878) by Neubauer et al. (2016), without referring to Bourguignatia though. [details]
