2007/10/16 by Christopher M. Wade, Cendrine Hudelot, Angus Davison +2 · 10 citations
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · Environmental Science · #Mollusks and Parasites Studies #Study of Mite Species #Insects and Parasite Interactions
paper · pdf · doi:10.1093/mollus/eym030
openalex publication_date 2007/10/16 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/04
The superfamily Helicoidea is a large and diverse group of land snails belonging to the Pulmonate suborder Stylommatophora. It has an almost worldwide distribution, absent from only sub-Saharan Africa, southern South America, New Zealand and some Pacific islands (Scott, 1996, 1997). The composition of the superfamily has remained somewhat controversial. Morphological studies have suggested the inclusion of between three and nine families, with only the Helicidae and Bradybaenidae common to all classifications (Thiele, 1931; Zilch, 1959–1960; Taylor & Sohl, 1962; Shileyko, 1979; Solem, 1979; Boss, 1982; Nordsieck, 1985, 1986; Tillier, 1989; Vaught, 1989; Scott, 1997; Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005). Our recent molecular study of the Stylommatophora has demonstrated the monophyly of a ‘Helicoidea’ comprising the Helicidae, Bradybaenidae, Helminthoglyptidae, Hygromiidae, Camaenidae, Polygyridae and Sagdidae (Wade, Mordan & Naggs, 2006). In this study, we apply molecular phylogenetic techniques to investigate specifically the evolutionary relationships within this ‘helicoid’ group. Of particular interest are the relationships among members of the helicoid family Camaenidae. The camaenids have an unusual bihemispheric disjunct distribution in Asia and Australasia (from Sri Lanka and India through Myanmar and southeast Asia to Japan, the Philippines, New Guinea to Australia and some Pacific islands) and Central and South America (from Costa Rica, the Greater and Lesser Antilles to northern Argentina) (Scott, 1996; Cuezzo, 2003). The Camaenidae are defined by the absence of a dart sac and related glands on the female genitalia (Pilsbry, 1939), but there is no unique synapomorphy that is characteristic of the group (Scott, 1996) and morphological studies are contradictory with regards to the monophyly or para/polyphyly of the group (Scott, 1996; Cuezzo, 2003). We use molecular data to specifically investigate this issue here.