Lamarck [J.-B. M.] de. (1818). <i>Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres</i>. Tome 5. Paris: Deterville/Verdière, 612 pp. , available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/46337 [details]
basis of record
Bouchet P. & Rocroi J.P. (2010). Nomenclator of bivalve families; with a classification of bivalve families by R. Bieler, J.G. Carter & E.V. Coan. <em>Malacologia.</em> 52(2): 1-184. [details]
Coan, E. V.; Valentich-Scott, P. (2012). Bivalve seashells of tropical West America. Marine bivalve mollusks from Baja California to northern Peru. 2 vols, 1258 pp. [details]
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Taxonomy Whereas species are easily recognized as members of Corbulidae at the family level, there is no general agreement on their arrangement into subfamilies and genera. The only currently (as of 2020) well supported suprageneric group is (Hallan & Anderson, 2013) subfamily Erodoniinae. Regarding the remaining members of the family, Anderson and Roopnarine (2003) accepted 12 genera but wrote “... the rank of these taxa is in flux. Some authors consider most or all to be separate genera, whereas others refer to them as subgenera, particularly of Corbula. (...) A full taxonomic revision must await expanded phylogenetic analyses with broader taxon, geographic, and temporal coverage.” Huber (2015: 839) used subgenera of Corbula and wrote "Undoubtedly, the application of genera by several authors is premature. The proper delineation and composition of genera for Recent marine Corbula requires much more data".
Conversely Squires & Saul (2004), Mikkelsen & Bieler (2010), Coan & Valentich Scott (2012) and Arruda (2020) treated several genera as valid. The treatment herein accepts genera when there is a reasonable consensus, and leaves in Corbula s.l. those species which have not recently received attention or have been placed inconsistently according to different contemporary authors. [details]