Anoura carishina was described based on cranial and dental morphology, but the original analyses did not include Anoura latidens , a similar species of Anoura . We used morphological, morphometric, and genetic analyses to evaluate the taxonomic identity of A. carishina. We performed a principal components analysis to evaluate the correspondence between morphological and taxonomic groups for 260 specimens of large-bodied Anoura ( A. carishina , Anoura geoffroyi , A. latidens , and Anoura peruana ), and statistically analyzed traits diagnostic for A. latidens , including (1) morphology of the third upper premolar (P 4 ), (2) size of the second (P 3 ) and third (P 4 ) upper premolars, and (3) angle formed by the maxillary toothrows. We find that A. latidens and A. carishina are indistinguishable, and share several characters lacking in A. geoffroyi , including a P 4 with triangular shape, an under-developed anterobasal cusp in the P 3 , a smaller braincase, and a shorter rostrum. Phylogenetic analyses using ultra-conserved elements infer that the holotype and two paratype specimens of A. carishina are paraphyletic and nested within A. latidens , while one paratype diagnosable by morphology as A. geoffroyi nests within A. geoffroyi samples. We demonstrate that A. carishina should be considered a junior synonym of A. latidens , updating the distribution of the latter.