20-30 Years ago most European Dune and Grass snails were usually mentioned
as belonging to the genus Helicella (esp. English authors). These same
snails are now scattered over a number of genera Helicella, Cernuella,
Candidula, Xerolenta, Xerosecta, etc. according to anatomical differences.
All these genera are now accepted by the specialists. Important differences
in the anatomy between Helix pomatia and "Helix" aspersa were reported
already more than a century ago. Giusti et al. were certainly not the first
to separate aspersa from the genus Helix, for quite some time aspersa has
been classified either as a Cryptomphalus or as a Cornu (especially in the
German literature). Giusti et al. have pointed out that the anatomy of
aspersa is rather similar to that of aperta the type of the genus Cantareus.
Yet in certain minor aspects there are still some differences, therefore
some authors prefer to place it in the subgenus Cryptomphalus of the genus
Cantareus. In fact the oldest name for this whole group is Cornu Mueller,
1774. The problem is: " Can we use the name Cornu?" According to Giusti et
al. Cornu in the form of Cornu arietis was based on a teratological specimen
and as such is not available for use in zoological nomenclature (ICZN
Article 1.3.2 , 4th Ed., 2000 ).
As long as we don't know everything about a certain species it may be
transferred from one genus to another.
Dozens of papers have been published about the polymorphism of Helix
nemoralis and H. hortensis. At a certain stage of our knowledge these papers
were followed by hundreds of articles dealing with the same subject but then
the same species were called Cepaea nemoralis and C. hortensis. So what! As
long as we know that former Helix aspersa is now
Cantareus/Cryptomphalus/Cornu aspersus/aspersa, it is allright.
Our knowledge is constantly growing: recent DNA studies within the
Strombidae have shown that Gibberulus and Canarium are not related at all to
each other or to the genus Strombus and should be treated as different
genera. I have the slight feeling that it will take 20-30 years until we
have adjusted to such names as Canarium mutabilis, Gibberulus gibberulus,
Tricornis tricornis and Conomurex persicus to name only a few Strombs.
Best regards,
Henk K. Mienis
----- Original Message -----
From: Cook Tony <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: Helix
Interesting question, interesting answer.
Perhaps someone could clarify for me when a name change (e.g. raising a
sub-genus to a genus, synonymies etc) becomes the universallly accepted
nomenclature. Is it just based on some authors getting it published
somewhere? Does it have to be refereed? Who chooses the referees? Is there
some worthy panel to be convinced of the change?
Sorry to sound naïve but having worked on an animal which has had four
different species names and two different generic names over the last 20
years or so, I'm beginning to get a little curious.
Tony C
Dr. A. Cook
Educational Development Unit
L029
Coleraine
028 7032 4453
-----Original Message-----
From: Henk and Zvia Mienis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 11 April 2001 19:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Helix
This question has been dealt with in extenso by Giusti,
Manganelli &
Schembri, 1995: 486-497, in The non-marine molluscs of the
Maltese Islands.
Mus. Reg. Sci. Nat. Torina, Monografie, 15: 607 pp. They
consider it as
complete different from Helix s.str.
Best regards,
Henk K. Mienis
----- Original Message -----
From: John Jacobs <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 7:44 PM
Subject: Helix
> Millard has Cantareus as a subgenus of Helix. When and
where was
Cantareus
> erected to full generic status, and did it replace Helix
completely?
>
> John Jacobs
> Seffner, FL
> [log in to unmask]
|
