MolluscaBase taxon details
Exilia pergracilis (Aldrich, 1886) †
764321 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:764321)
accepted
Species
Fasciolaria pergracilis Aldrich, 1886 · unaccepted > superseded combination
marine
fossil only
(of Fasciolaria pergracilis Aldrich, 1886) Aldrich, T. H. (1886). Preliminary report on the Tertiary fossils of Alabama and Mississippi. <em>Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Alabama.</em> 1: 15-60, pls. 1-6., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/20740016
page(s): 22-23, pl. 5, fig. 18 [details]
page(s): 22-23, pl. 5, fig. 18 [details]
Type locality contained in Alabama
type locality contained in Alabama [from synonym] [view taxon] [details]
Homonymy "Synonymizing the monotypic genus Palaeorhaphis with Exilia makes Palaeorhaphis pergracilis (Aldrich) a secondary homonym...
Homonymy "Synonymizing the monotypic genus Palaeorhaphis with Exilia makes Palaeorhaphis pergracilis (Aldrich) a secondary homonym of Exilia pergracilis Conrad. As there may well be a junior synonym the name of which can be used as a substitute, we do not propose a new name." (Kantor et al. 2001) [details]
MolluscaBase eds. (2024). MolluscaBase. Exilia pergracilis (Aldrich, 1886) †. Accessed at: https://www.molluscabase.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=764321 on 2024-04-20
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
(of Fasciolaria pergracilis Aldrich, 1886) Aldrich, T. H. (1886). Preliminary report on the Tertiary fossils of Alabama and Mississippi. <em>Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Alabama.</em> 1: 15-60, pls. 1-6., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/20740016
page(s): 22-23, pl. 5, fig. 18 [details]
page(s): 22-23, pl. 5, fig. 18 [details]
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Homonymy "Synonymizing the monotypic genus Palaeorhaphis with Exilia makes Palaeorhaphis pergracilis (Aldrich) a secondary homonym of Exilia pergracilis Conrad. As there may well be a junior synonym the name of which can be used as a substitute, we do not propose a new name." (Kantor et al. 2001) [details]
