From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

18 Jan 2022

This article should not be deleted, but instead be redirected to Pila, because Ampullaria still remains an available name in taxonomy. JoJan ( talk) 16:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Doing so would have been my first instinct, but not all species that were classed as Ampullaria are now classed as Pila. In fact, a huge plurality of them are classed as Pomacea, which outweighs Pila in both number of species and human significance. -- Equivamp - talk 23:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply
Three Ampullaria sub-genera (Limnopomus, Pomacea, and Effusa) have been synonymized with/as Pomacea. Simply saying that Ampullaria is synonymous with Pila is too simplistic and likely misleading, as it leaves out a huge part of the picture. -- Equivamp - talk 23:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

18 Jan 2022

This article should not be deleted, but instead be redirected to Pila, because Ampullaria still remains an available name in taxonomy. JoJan ( talk) 16:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Doing so would have been my first instinct, but not all species that were classed as Ampullaria are now classed as Pila. In fact, a huge plurality of them are classed as Pomacea, which outweighs Pila in both number of species and human significance. -- Equivamp - talk 23:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply
Three Ampullaria sub-genera (Limnopomus, Pomacea, and Effusa) have been synonymized with/as Pomacea. Simply saying that Ampullaria is synonymous with Pila is too simplistic and likely misleading, as it leaves out a huge part of the picture. -- Equivamp - talk 23:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook