Asperdaphne contigua
extinct species of gastropod
Asperdaphne contigua is an extinct species of sea snail, a marine gastropod mollusc, in the family Raphitomidae. Fossils of the species date to the middle Miocene strata of the Port Phillip Basin of Victoria, Australia.
Description
In the original description, Powell described the species as follows:
Broader, more squat-spired than balcombensis, with similar sculpture but fewer axials and spirals. Protoconch similar to that of above species, but more elevated, Axials 12 per whorl, curving half way over concave, smooth shoulder, which is at four-fifths whorl height. Below, the axials extend over the base to the anterior end. There are four narrow but distinct primary spiral cords on the spire-whorls, with a thread in each interspace, and two above the shoulder angle between the uppermost primary and the smooth sinus area, The anterior end bears 9 strong cords, but no axials. Other features as in balcombensis.
The holotype of the species has a height of 6.8 mm (0.27 in), and a diameter of 3 mm (0.12 in).
Taxonomy
The species was first described by A. W. B. Powell in 1944. In 2011, A. G. Beu recombined the species as Pleurotomella contigua, a change not accepted by Thomas A. Darragh (2024) or the World Register of Marine Species.
The public source identifies “Asperdaphne contigua” as extinct species of gastropod. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Asperdaphne, contigua and extinct.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Asperdaphne contigua”, the useful work is to connect “extinct species of gastropod” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q137361158. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1944, 2011 and 2024.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Asperdaphne contigua”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Asperdaphne contigua primary sources, Asperdaphne contigua archive and Asperdaphne research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Asperdaphne contigua”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Asperdaphne contigua” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.