MolluscaBase name details
Anodonta couperiana I. Lea, 1840
1421064 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1421064)
unaccepted > superseded combination
Species
Anodonta cowperiana I. Lea, 1840 · unaccepted (original combination; changed to...)
original combination; changed to Anodonta couperiana by I. Lea (1842), now considered the correct original spelling under ICZN Art. 33.3.1
Not documented
MolluscaBase eds. (2025). MolluscaBase. Anodonta couperiana I. Lea, 1840. Accessed at: https://molluscabase.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1421064 on 2025-09-10
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 License
additional source
Frierson, L. S. (1912). Notes on <i>Anodonta couperiana</i> and <i>A. gibbosa</i>. <em>The Nautilus.</em> 25(11): 129-130., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1818320 [details]
additional source Johnson, R. I. (1969). Further additions to the unionid fauna of the Gulf Drainage of Alabama, Georgia and Florida. <em>The Nautilus.</em> 83(1): 34-35., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8515298
page(s): 34-35 [details]
status source Bieler, R. (2021). Isaac Lea's (1792-1886) substitutions and other modifications of his own names of molluscan species. <em>Malacologia.</em> 64(1): 1-56.
page(s): 9 [details] Available for editors
[request]
additional source Johnson, R. I. (1969). Further additions to the unionid fauna of the Gulf Drainage of Alabama, Georgia and Florida. <em>The Nautilus.</em> 83(1): 34-35., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8515298
page(s): 34-35 [details]
status source Bieler, R. (2021). Isaac Lea's (1792-1886) substitutions and other modifications of his own names of molluscan species. <em>Malacologia.</em> 64(1): 1-56.
page(s): 9 [details] Available for editors
[request]From editor or global species database
Spelling Lea (1842) corrected the spelling from U. cowperiana (honoring "J. H. Couper" instead of "J. H. Cowper" as given in the original description). The correction did not qualify as an emendation, but the secondary spelling was adopted into prevailing usage and us considered a correct original spelling under ICZN (1999) Article 33.3.1 (Bieler, 2021: 9) [details]
