Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2005 14:47:55 GMT
Well when I get Anneth's immaculata I can compare them to my old immaculata shells when they get that big. But the thing is, my old immaculata looked pretty dimidiata-ish.
How do you get DNA tests done? who does them? Do you need a scientist? Yes I would love to know about the classification of species. It's annoying that 150 years after these snails are discovered theres still loads of questions about their status.
One thing about immaculata being panthera sub-species, if that's true then shouldn't we be calling immaculata 'Lissachatina'?
Yes I was confused about how little difference there is in ovum, suturalis and marginata.
You're right panthera is much more different to immaculata than dimidiata. If immaculata is a sub-species, then surely dimidiata can't be a sub-species of a sub-species. Maybe they're the same, or maybe theres internal or DNA differences.
kind regards
mike
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 20, 2005 16:18:53 GMT
I know what you mean, Bequaert lists quite a few as subgenus Lissachatina. If they have been preserved in those groups then they would be elevated to Lissachatina proper. But, I have only done this for fulica and panthera because I was told by BNHM that they were definitely Lissachatina. Bequaert lists things like iredalei as lissachatina so that made me cautious because it was pre-elevation. I have just seen some more pics of albino immaculata, this time Evelyns. I know you all think I'm mad but I just can't help being convinced they are the same as my dimidiata. They look EXACTLY the same in every respect except on Evelyns the two-tone is slightly lighter . Shell shape, body, features such as the pink columella and the colour bleed around it are the same. It seems perfectly credible to me that at some stage one type has been misidentified. Originally I assumed it was the albino immaculata. But I'm willing to accept that it could be the dimidiata. I don't mean any disrespect to the snail community but it definitely seems to me that we're all winging the identification stuff, we get told something and that becomes "truth". Imagine the scenario, a species comes into Europe and is sold to two people as different species. They reproduce and get passed on to more people who believe what they are told. The differences after successive generations would compound this error. I'm not being a hard-on about this, I just think it is a definite possibility and I'd like to know. Well, I'm sure wel all would. Mike, do you fancy getting some dimidiata babies from Beth? Or perhaps I could get some immaculata, although to be honest I don't have room. That way, with one of us owning both types we have a better chance of figuring out. In fact, I may try and get some baby immaculata. My girlfriend will go nuts but it's eating me away, lol. Or perhaps someone would be willing to swap 2 albino immaculata adults for 2 dimidiata adults. That way, I can really compare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2005 18:08:46 GMT
wow this lissachatina genus is very confusing. so are panthera and fulica the only ones you know that are in the lissachatina genus?
i didn't know there were so many albino immaculata. i would be cautious if i heard a snail being called albino. people should realise albino means the snail is pure white.
Imagine the scenario, a species comes into Europe and is sold to two people as different species. They reproduce and get passed on to more people who believe what they are told.
- yes i definitely agree with you on this. immaculata are so variable that if there were two types of snail that were the same species, but listed with different names, people would be none the wiser.
i'm sorry i dont have enough room for immaculata. infact by the time my current snails have become adults, i won't have enough room for them. although when i get my new immaculata, i could compare them with my old immaculata and see what differences i can see.
That book by the conchological society of south africa would be very useful. if immaculata and dimidiata are different species, surely there are differences besides the shell markings that can sometimes overlap between the two species.
When your dimidiata grow and my immaculata grow, we can then compare shell and body characteristics
kind regards
mike
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 20, 2005 18:46:45 GMT
Panthera and fulica are the only ones I know for definite. The list when Lissachatina was a subgenus, not a genus proper, is fulica, lactea, panthera, zanzibarica, allisa, delorioli, iredalei, albopicta and reticulata.
Some of these species are in Bequaert's book but never mentioned anywhere else?!
I'll be avidly watching the progress of your babies!
|
|
KentuckyDutchieArno
Guest
|
Post by KentuckyDutchieArno on Jul 21, 2005 19:58:19 GMT
Regarding the dimidiata/immaculata species I read that they have two different areas of distribution:dimidiata in South-Africa and immaculata in West-Africa.I agree they can be the same species or dimidiata a subspecies or variety of immaculata.What i think is strange that i can't find a name of the person who first described dimidiata(Paul any ideas?),as in A. immaculata Lamarck, 1821.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 21, 2005 21:49:19 GMT
Achatina dimidiata Martens (1889) is mentioned as a probable synonym of Achatina balteata var. infrafusca Martens. It says "...uniformly chestnut-brown; at the limit between the two colors with occasional darker spots." But then it mentions the columella being blueish so that is wrong. There is another; Achatina dimidiata Smith (1878), which Bequaerts lists as different but says no more than that.
Regarding distribution, that is one of my points, that South African site mentions immaculata are the only one with a pink columella in that area!? And yet the dimidiata have and they're South African, unless they mean a specific location which they don't list as far as I'm aware. I had heard that immaculata were west-african also.
That and the other things discussed are what made we wonder if these "albino" snails (which don't look that albino because they have pigment) were actually misidentified dimidiata.
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 7:05:46 GMT
I now have both The immacs are much smaller/younger than the dimidiata are so at the moment any differences I can see could be down to that. But.... The immacs are obviously and definatly darker, more the colour of tiger babies are. The stripes are thinner, and closer together. I have looked back at pictures of all our dimidiata when they were this size and the dimidiata never seemed to have such thin and so many stripes, they were more patchy at this size, the stripes kind of came later. Am I making sense? I'm not sure. To put it simply.... To me they look like they have the shell colour and pattern of a tiger baby, and the shape of dimidiata. Skin colour is extremely similar, I'm sure the immacs are slightly more orangey though. But even with all this, you will see from pic I put on, they are extremely similar. Its going to be very interesting watching them grow together Glad I got them, they are beautiful little snails. I will get lots more detailed pics soon, just took a quick one yesterday so they could go in their tank and settle in. Nat
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Aug 12, 2005 8:03:36 GMT
Yes, I have less pale examples of dimidiata. One of mine is actually quite dark and if you look at Fredriks pictures, they're even more so.
Mine have the thin stripes, thinner than my tigers I would have said. It is these that fuse to form the chestnut bit. And obviously there is a lot of variation generally.
But I'm sticking to my theory of them being the same until someone proves otherwise. So far, as far as I'm concerned the evidence is pointing that way. It seems more fantastical to me that they are not. They just look so unlike "real" albino immaculata that I have seen. But I'm dragging up old ground here. I'm just flabbergasted not everyone sees it the same, lol!
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 8:12:43 GMT
Well I just wrote the differences I could see, I'm no expert far from it, it was said that it would be an idea for someone to own both and do this, and I did
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 8:18:25 GMT
Just had em out, noticed something else. The way the dimidiata put their heads right up in the air eyes up tall (I've only seen dimidiata do it to this extent) The immacs did that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2005 10:49:18 GMT
NOOOOO dont bring this up again
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Aug 12, 2005 15:06:27 GMT
Why!? Surely this is the point of the entire forum and website, is it not? I want to know for certain, it frustrates me how much in the snail world is just accepted without evidence.
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 15:12:50 GMT
I want to find out one way or another I dont particularly care what each 1 is....... they are still gorgeous, but I would like to get to the bottom of it.
|
|
Val
Archachatina dimidiata
Posts: 2,498
|
Post by Val on Aug 12, 2005 17:11:20 GMT
Maybe there isn't a "bottom of it" to get to!! Maybe nobody knows for sure? The differences sometimes are so slight. but I agree that it sure would be nice to know exactly which species you own. Val x
|
|
anneth
Achatina fulica
Posts: 1
|
Post by anneth on Aug 12, 2005 17:47:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 17:54:57 GMT
Awwww Anneth they are beautiful snails Mine are doing great by the way ;D Thank you once again, they have settled in great and eating very well.
|
|
|
Post by eric2 on Aug 12, 2005 18:00:22 GMT
those shells look like one of the pictures of shells that the british natural history museum sent me
eric
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Aug 12, 2005 20:20:09 GMT
look at that first picture and tell me that the one on the left isn't the same as my dimidiata
|
|
|
Post by natrat84 on Aug 12, 2005 20:22:41 GMT
Paul, where ARE the pics of yours lol I not sure I have ever seen them, any of your snails actually, your slacking
|
|
Arno
Archachatina puylaerti
Posts: 1,493
|
Post by Arno on Aug 12, 2005 20:56:12 GMT
Yes you are right,that one looks like yours.But the other snails look a bit different. Have you read the reply from the NHM?What do you make of that then?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2005 9:03:59 GMT
maybe i cud sort this out. i cud get a wild immaculata (if this african site replies) and then we cud have a look at that and see how much like dimidiata it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2005 9:07:53 GMT
i dont think theyre the same thing. i think that captive immaculata and captive dimidiata were bred from a few specimens that just *happened* to look similar. im sure that theres more variation in wild dimidiata and immaculata so that they dont look the same. some immaculata shells ive seen look more like panthera.
kind regards
mike
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2005 9:12:11 GMT
maybe anneth's are a crossbreed. the snail on the left looks like dimidiata but the one on the right looks like immaculata and anneth's looks like a mixture
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Aug 13, 2005 16:32:42 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2005 19:12:08 GMT
I must have missed that. it makes it sounds like the immaculata are the ones with the more defined two-tone shell! Plus it also suggests they are similar. Where are the photos? what message are u referring to? anyway paul can i see pics of ur magical, special dimidiata?
|
|