Although the evidence said 𪄻 was a misprint of ⿰鳥春, the character is 𪄻 in 《廣韻》. it seems that more evidence is needed.




https://ctext.org/library.pl?if=gb&file=1500&page=29#%F0%AA%87%86
《重修廣韻》，《四庫全書》



https://ctext.org/library.pl?if=gb&file=88948&page=16#%E8%88%82
《泰定本廣韻》，《古逸叢書》

As Hou Man mentioned, this character is related to U+2A13B 𪄻. The followings are the relative entries in different version of 《廣韻》



符山堂藏板 shows 䮷𪄻 and 𪇆鶺.


龍谷大學藏至正南山書院刊本 shows 𪇆鶺.


覆元泰定本 shows 𪇆𪂹.


宋乾道五年刻本 shows 𪇆&⿰眷鳥;, which the second character has been included in CNS 11643 as TB-4917.


古逸叢書覆宋本 shows 𪇆&GKJ-00739;.


四部叢刊巾箱本 shows 𪇆&GKJ-00739;.

However, the second character is under 鍾韻, and the reading is the same as 舂, so the most proper glyph should be 𪄻.

The text in the evidence is a section of collation, obviously the author knows ⿰鳥春 is the wrong glyph of 𪄻.

In response to Tao Yang, I guess it is a question of whether we should encode known error forms noted in critical editions of texts, or whether cited error forms such as this should be represented as PUA characters. (I personally am happy to encode error forms if they are cited in printed editions.)