MolluscaBase name details
Mytilomorpha Hind, 1899 †
1653750 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1653750)
unaccepted > junior objective synonym
Genus
- Species Mytilomorpha sibirica Benediktova, 1950 † accepted as Goniophora sibirica (Benediktova, 1950) † (unaccepted > superseded combination, genus is an objective synonym)
marine, fresh, terrestrial
fossil only
feminine
Hind, W. (1899). A Monograph of the British Carboniferous Lamellibranchiata. Part IV. Edmondidae, Cyprinidae, Crassitellidae. <em>Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society.</em> 53: 277–360, pls. 26-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02693445.1899.12035488
page(s): 338 [details]
page(s): 338 [details]
Status Established as a substitute name for Goniophora Phillips, 1848, by Hind considered to be preoccupied "by Agassiz for a...
Status Established as a substitute name for Goniophora Phillips, 1848, by Hind considered to be preoccupied "by Agassiz for a genus of crinoids"; this is Goniophorus Agassiz, 1838, which is not a homonym of Goniophora. Mytilimorpha [Williams & Breger, 1916, United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, 89: 228, 229] is an incorrect subsequent spelling. [details]
MolluscaBase eds. (2024). MolluscaBase. Mytilomorpha Hind, 1899 †. Accessed at: https://molluscabase.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1653750 on 2024-04-27
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Hind, W. (1899). A Monograph of the British Carboniferous Lamellibranchiata. Part IV. Edmondidae, Cyprinidae, Crassitellidae. <em>Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society.</em> 53: 277–360, pls. 26-39., available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02693445.1899.12035488
page(s): 338 [details]
page(s): 338 [details]
From editor or global species database
Status Established as a substitute name for Goniophora Phillips, 1848, by Hind considered to be preoccupied "by Agassiz for a genus of crinoids"; this is Goniophorus Agassiz, 1838, which is not a homonym of Goniophora. Mytilimorpha [Williams & Breger, 1916, United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, 89: 228, 229] is an incorrect subsequent spelling. [details]
