WoRMS name details

Teredo miraflora Bartsch, 1922

531918  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:531918)

 unaccepted (has priority if synonymy is correct)
Species
marine
(of Teredo (Neoteredo) miraflora Bartsch, 1922) Bartsch, P. (1922). A monograph of the American shipworms. <em>United States National Museum Bulletin.</em> 122: 1-51., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7875085
page(s): 50 [details]   
Nomenclature Turner (1966: 111-112) considered T. miraflora a nomen dubium on the basis of morphology, but on the basis of type locality...  
Nomenclature Turner (1966: 111-112) considered T. miraflora a nomen dubium on the basis of morphology, but on the basis of type locality considered it a synonym of T. healdi, over which it has priority if the synonymy is correct (G. Rosenberg, 13 October 2010). [details]
MolluscaBase eds. (2024). MolluscaBase. Teredo miraflora Bartsch, 1922. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=531918 on 2024-04-20
Date
action
by
2010-10-14 00:31:36Z
created
2022-10-09 06:05:11Z
changed

Creative Commons License The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License


original description  (of Teredo (Neoteredo) miraflora Bartsch, 1922) Bartsch, P. (1922). A monograph of the American shipworms. <em>United States National Museum Bulletin.</em> 122: 1-51., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/7875085
page(s): 50 [details]   

source of synonymy Turner, R. D. (1966). <i>A survey and illustrated catalogue of Teredinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia)</i>. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge (Massachusetts). ix + 265 pp. , available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/134382
page(s): 111 [details]   
From editor or global species database
Nomenclature Turner (1966: 111-112) considered T. miraflora a nomen dubium on the basis of morphology, but on the basis of type locality considered it a synonym of T. healdi, over which it has priority if the synonymy is correct (G. Rosenberg, 13 October 2010). [details]