Citing Two Manuscript Versions of the Same Québec Civil Register Entry

I am seeking guidance on the proper citation treatment for two digital images of what appears to be the same Québec civil vital register entry, accessed through two different repositories, where the images differ materially.

The record in question is the 10 January 1750 burial entry for Pierre Dasilva dit Portugais of St-Jean, Île d’Orléans, Québec. The image accessed through Généalogie Québec appears to show a damaged manuscript page from the civil register. The image accessed through Ancestry’s “Quebec, Canada, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621–1968” shows the same burial entry but in a different handwriting, suggesting that it may represent a duplicate register copy or later manuscript version rather than the identical physical page.

Because the two images provide complementary information—the damaged image appears closer to one manuscript version, while the second preserves the full entry—I cited both images in a single reference note. I would appreciate guidance on whether this approach properly identifies and correlates the two versions, or whether the two manuscript versions should instead receive separate citations with additional discussion in the text or citation note explaining their relationship.

My current first-reference note is:

Île d'Orléans (Québec, Canada), "Civil Vital Register for St-Jean, 1750," Pierre Dasilva Portugais burial, 10 January 1750; database with images, Généalogie Québec (https://www.genealogiequebec.com/Membership/LAFRANCE/img/tag/d1p_31461504.jpg : accessed 7 July 2026); imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp. Drouin Collection. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Institut Généalogique Drouin." Also, "Quebec, Canada, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621–1968," database with images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/1091/ : accessed 7 July 2026), burial, Pierre Dasilva dit Portugais, 10 January 1750, Civil Vital Register for 1731–1750, St-Jean Parish, Office of the Greffe, Quebec; imaged from microfilm identified as “Gabriel Drouin, comp. Drouin Collection. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Institut Généalogique Drouin.”

Specifically:

1. Should these be cited together as two images of the same record, as above, or separately as two distinct manuscript versions of the same event?
2. Should the citation explicitly identify one as the parish register copy and the other as the greffe (civil) copy if that distinction can be determined?
3. When both images derive from the Drouin microfilm collection but represent different handwritten copies, what is the preferred Evidence Explained method for identifying the layered provenance (original register/copy → Drouin microfilm → digital provider)?