Euglandina rosea (rosy predator snail)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Biology and Ecology
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Impact
- Threatened Species
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- References
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Euglandina rosea Férussac, 1821
Preferred Common Name
- rosy predator snail
Other Scientific Names
- Achatina rosea Férussac, 1821
- Glandina parallela Binney, 1878
- Glandina truncata Say, 1831
- Helix rosea Férussac, 1821
- Polyphemus glans Say, 1818
International Common Names
- English: Cannibal snail; Rosy wolf snail
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageE. rosea has had a negative impact on native snail species in the countries into which it has been introduced. It has been responsible for the dramatic decline or eradication of many endemic species, particularly Partulidae and Achatinellinae (Cowie, 2001, 2003). On the Society Islands, French Polynesia, alone, only five of the original 61 species remain (Coote and Loeve, 2003). E. rosea is listed on the IUCN ISSG among 100 of the world's worst invasive species and IUCN has condemned its deliberate introduction as a biological control agent.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Mollusca
- Class: Gastropoda
- Subclass: Pulmonata
- Order: Stylommatophora
- Suborder: Sigmurethra
- Unknown: Achatinoidea
- Family: Spiraxidae
- Genus: Euglandina
- Species: Euglandina rosea
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageE. rosea is a pulmonate snail, native to the south-eastern part of North America. Pilsbry (1946) summarizes the nomenclature of Euglandina and states that the type specimen figured by Férussac was a form from Florida, USA, collected by Say on the sea islands of Georgia and in Florida. The type locality is thus given as St. Augustine, one of Say's collection sites.
Description
Top of pageThe eggs are oval, 4.25 mm long and 3-3.25 mm wide. The eggshell is rough-surfaced, quite porous, brittle and hard. The young must rasp an opening in the shell, using the radula, before they are able to emerge from the egg. Incubation took 30-40 days with a success rate of 85-100% under artificial conditions in Taiwan (Chiu and Chou, 1962), suggesting a considerable reproductive potential. This is borne out by censuses carried out on populations introduced to Pacific islands in the late 1960s (Mead 1961).
Adults
The shell is oblong, glossy surfaced, with a regularly tapering spire and a blunt apex. There are approximately six whorls. The first three whorls are smooth; the rest are irregularly sculptured with fine longitudinal grooves, occasional deeper grooves, but no spiral lines. The spire and apex is usually a pink shade, usually fading to buff-pink in dead specimens or in scientific collections. The aperture is more than twice as long as it is wide, with a thickened lip and pink interior. Shell length varies from 49 to 76 mm, diameter from 21 to 27.5 mm.
The living animal is an active and rapacious hunter. They move rapidly and actively hunt their prey by following slime trails. The dorsal tentacles have a distinctive lobe beneath the eye, whilst the ventral tentacle is somewhat shorter, with no lobe. The oral lips are highly active, have a chemosensory role, are much longer than the ventral tentacles and give the snail a distinctive 'moustachioed' appearance (Cook, 1985b).
Distribution
Top of pageThe distribution of E. rosea and status of the various introduced populations has been summarized by Griffiths et al. (1993) and by Civeyrel and Simberloff (1996). Surviving populations (the date of introduction is given in parentheses) can be found in Bermuda (introduced 1958-60), Grand Comorro (1970), Guam (1958), Hawaii (1955), Madagascar (1970), Mauritius (1959), Micronesia (?), Moorea (1977), New Caledonia (1974-78), New Guinea (1959-61), Okinawa (1958-61), Palau (1960), Réunion (1966), Rodrigues (ca 1961), Saipan (?), Samoa (1980-84), Seychelles (1966), Society islands (1974), Ta'u (Samoa) (1992) and Vanuatu (1973-74) (Civeyrel and Simberloff, 1996). Cowie (2000, 2003) has updated the distribution of E. rosea, noting that it is also found in Indonesia, Kiribati and the Solomon Islands.
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 17 Dec 2021Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Madagascar | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Mauritius | Present, Widespread | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Réunion | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Seychelles | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Asia |
|||||||
China | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
Hong Kong | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
India | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Andaman and Nicobar Islands | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Indonesia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Japan | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Malaysia | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Sabah | Present | ||||||
Sri Lanka | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Taiwan | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
North America |
|||||||
Bahamas | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Bermuda | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
United States | Present | ||||||
-Alabama | Present | Native | |||||
-Florida | Present | Native | |||||
-Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
-Louisiana | Present | Native | |||||
-Mississippi | Present | Native | |||||
-South Carolina | Present | Native | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
American Samoa | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Federated States of Micronesia | Present | ||||||
French Polynesia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Guam | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Kiribati | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
New Caledonia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Northern Mariana Islands | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Palau | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Papua New Guinea | Absent, Formerly present | ||||||
Samoa | Present | ||||||
Solomon Islands | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Vanuatu | Present | Introduced | Invasive |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageRisk of Introduction
Top of pageThe potential for further spread of E. rosea is primarily through further deliberate introductions. The IUCN ISSG has listed E. rosea amongst 100 of the world's worst invasive species and condemned its use as a biological control agent. However, Cowie (2000) stated that intense pressure from Pacific Islanders to resolve the problem of Achatina fulica may lead to its deliberate official or unofficial release. Increasing trade between countries could also lead to the introduction of E. rosea into new habitats (Cowie, 1998).
Habitat
Top of pageHosts/Species Affected
Top of pageBiology and Ecology
Top of pageReproductive Biology
E. rosea is an obligate cross-fertilizing hermaphrodite. Its mating behaviour has been described by Ingram and Heming (1942), Chiu and Chou (1962), and most recently by Cook (1985a). The snail lives for about 2 years and adult snails lay 25-35 eggs at each oviposition, producing approximately 100 eggs during their lifespan (Chiu and Chou, 1962). The snail is primarily nocturnal and is usually ground living, but will climb trees (Griffiths et al., 1993) and enter shallow water courses in pursuit of prey (Kinzie, 1992).
Prey Detection and Feeding Behaviour
Several aspects of the feeding behaviour and prey detection in Euglandina have been described by Ingram and Heming (1942), Cook (1985a, b; 1989a, b) and Kinzie (1992). Euglandina appears to detect its prey by following slime trails (Cook, 1985b; Clifford et al., 2003), which it does more than 80% of the time (Clifford et al., 2003) or by detecting dissolved substances in water (Kinzie, 1992). Chemical components of the mucus and perhaps the shell, together with the physical dimensions of the shell are the most important determinants of prey suitability (Cook, 1989a, b). Euglandina will also consume randomly encountered static prey. When contact is made with the prey, it is usually picked up with the foot and swallowed whole, or the soft parts of the prey are extracted from the shell. Which feeding technique is utilized depends on a number of factors, including the relative sizes of predator and prey and probably also the nutrient status of the predator (Cook, 1985b; 1989b). In gastropods of any given species, Euglandina showed a clear preference for the smaller individuals (Chiu and Chou, 1962; Cook, 1989b).
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageHadfield et al. (1993) suggested that rats (Rattus rattus, R. norvegicus) might have a significant effect on Euglandina populations, especially as it is typically a ground-dwelling snail.
Plant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Growing medium accompanying plants | Pest or symptoms usually invisible |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Animal/plant collections | None |
Animal/plant products | None |
Biodiversity (generally) | None |
Crop production | None |
Environment (generally) | None |
Fisheries / aquaculture | None |
Forestry production | None |
Human health | None |
Livestock production | None |
Native fauna | Negative |
Native flora | None |
Rare/protected species | None |
Tourism | None |
Trade/international relations | None |
Transport/travel | None |
Impact
Top of pageThe economic impact of E. rosea is difficult to determine. Whilst it appears to have had no effect on the control of Achatina, it has had a devastating impact on the endemic snail faunas of many of the islands to which it has been introduced (Hadfield et al., 1993; Cowie, 2001; Gerlach, 2003). This in turn has been damaging to scientific investigations of those species, notably the work carried out by Clark and others on the genetic diversity of Partula on Moorea (Civeyrel and Simberloff, 1996). A considerable international effort is underway to conserve these threatened island snails, which includes captive breeding programmes and the creation of reserves free from Euglandina.
Threatened Species
Top of pageThreatened Species | Conservation Status | Where Threatened | Mechanism | References | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Achatinella mustelina | CR (IUCN red list: Critically endangered) | Hawaii | Predation | Hadfield et al. (1993) | |
Erinna newcombi (Newcomb's snail) | VU (IUCN red list: Vulnerable); USA ESA listing as threatened species | Hawaii | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2006) | |
Eua zebrina (Tutuila tree snail) | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | American Samoa | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2014a) | |
Newcombia cumingi (Newcomb's tree snail) | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2013) | |
Ostodes strigatus (sisi snail) | USA ESA listing as endangered species | American Samoa | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2014b) | |
Partulina semicarinata (Lanai tree snail) | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2013) | |
Partulina variabilis (Lanai tree snail) | EN (IUCN red list: Endangered); USA ESA listing as endangered species | Hawaii | Predation | US Fish and Wildlife Service (2013) |
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageSimilarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageReferences
Top of pageBinney WG, 1885. A manual of north American land snails. Bulletin of the United States National Museum, 28:348-350.
Chiu SC, Chou KC, 1962. Observations on the biology of the carnivorous snail Euglandina rosea Ferussac. Bulletin of the Institute of Zoology, Academia Sinica (Taipei), 1:17-24.
Clifford KT, Gross L, Johnson K, Martin KJ, Shaheen N, Harrington MA, 2003. Slime-trail tracking in the predatory snail, Euglandina rosea. Behavioural Neuroscience, 117(5):1086-1095.
Cook A, 1985a. The courtship of Euglandina rosea Férussac. Journal of Molluscan Studies, 51:211-214.
Cook A, 1985b. The organisation of feeding in the carniverous snail Euglandina rosea Férussac. Malacologia, 26:183-189.
Coote T, Loeve E, 2003. From 61 species to five: endemic tree snails of the Society Islands fall prey to an ill-judged biological control programme. Oryx, 37(1):91-96.
Cowie RH, 1998. Patterns of introduction of non-indigenous non-marine snails and slugs in the Hawaiian Islands. Biodiversity and Conservation, 7(3):349-368.
Cowie RH, 2000. Non-indigenous land and freshwater molluscs in the islands of the Pacific: conservation impacts and threats. In: Sherley G, ed. Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical review and draft regional Strategy. SPREP, 143-166.
Cowie RH, 2003. ISSG Global Invasive Species Database. http://issg.appfa.auckland.ac.nz/database/species/search.
Gerlach J, 2003. Predator, prey and pathogen interactions in introduced snail populations. Animal Conservation, 4(3):203-209.
Griffiths O, Cook A, Wells SM, 1993. The diet of the introduced carnivorous snail Euglandina rosea in Mauritius and its implications for threatened island gastropod faunas. Journal of Zoology, 229:79-89.
Hadfield MG, Miller SE, Carwile AH, 1993. The decimation of endemic Hawai'ian tree snails by alien predators. American Zoologist, 33:610-622.
Ingram WM, Heming WE, 1942. Food, eggs and young of the carnivorous snail Euglandina rosea (Férussac). Zoologica, 27:81-84.
Kinzie III RA, 1992. Predation by the introduced carniverous snail Euglandina rosea (Ferussac) on endemic aquatic lymnaeid snail in Hawaii. Biological Conservation, 60:149-155.
Mace GM, Pearce-Kelly P, Clark D, 1998. An integrated conservation programme for the tree snails (Partulidae) of Polynesia: A review of captive and wild elements. Journal of Conchology, Supplement 2:89:96.
Mead AR, 1961. The Giant African Snail: A Problem in Economic Malacology. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press, 257 pp.
Pilsbry HA, 1946. Land Mollusca of North America (North of Mexico). Monograph no.3. Philadelphia, USA: The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.
Distribution References
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Cowie RH, 2003. ISSG Global Invasive Species Database., http://issg.appfa.auckland.ac.nz/database/species/search
Griffiths O, Cook A, Wells SM, 1993. The diet of the introduced carnivorous snail Euglandina rosea in Mauritius and its implications for threatened island gastropod faunas. In: Journal of Zoology, 229 79-89.
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/