The protologue of this name has not been seen. It was cited by Linnaeus in the protologue of Mitchella repens, but Linnaeus citation was of Mitchell's 1748 publication of that name, which is too early to qualify as published under our modern rules. Perhaps the later, valid publication of this cited Mitchella as a synonym, in which case this is now (ironically) an illegitimate superfluous name for Mitchella.