Follow the Footsteps of Leonardo Fea: An Example of an Integrative Revision of Freshwater Mussel Taxa Described from the Former British Burma (Myanmar)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leonardo Fea, an Italian explorer and traveler, sampled a comprehensive collection of continental Mollusca during his travels throughout the former British Burma (currently Myanmar) in 1885-1887. Cesare Maria Tapparone-Canefri, an Italian malacologist, studied this sample and published a paper with a description of numerous terrestrial and freshwater molluscan taxa new to science. This collection was partly deposited in the Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Genova (MSNG), Italy and the Indian Museum (ZSI: Zoological Survey of India) in Kolkata. Here, we provide a re-analysis of C.M. Tapparone-Canefri’s Burmese Unionidae collection. Our study reveals that the type series of only four nominal taxa described by Tapparone-Canefri as new to science in 1889 are still available in the MSNG, i.e. Unio rectangularis, U. pulcher, U. protensus var. obtusatus, and U. marginalis var. subflabellata. The first taxon is a valid species belonging to the genus Yaukthwa, while U. pulcher and U. protensus var. obtusatus are considered here as junior synonyms of the widespread Lamellidens generosus, and the last nominal taxon corresponds to L. savadiensis. The MSNG collection also contains shell lots of Indochinella pugio pugio, I. pugio paradoxa, Indonaia andersoniana, Radiatula chaudhurii, R. mouhoti haungthayawensis, Lamellidens savadiensis, L. generosus, Yaukthwa nesemanni, and Y. zayleymanensis, most of which were listed in Tapparone-Canefri’s work under incorrect names. We revise all the freshwater mussel taxa listed by Tapparone-Canefri based on the original descriptions, available DNA sequences, morphological data, and biogeographic evidence. A freshwater mussel from the Haungthayaw River that was identified by Tapparone-Canefri as Unio exolescens is described here as Trapezoideus mitanensis sp. nov., a fourth species in this small Contradentini genus with a restricted range. Finally, new taxonomic opinions are proposed here for Leoparreysia tavoyensis, Trapezidens dolichorhynchus, Lamellidens generosus, and Lamellidens savadiensis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".