“…Therefore, in Lymnaeidae it has been more recently concluded that (i) rDNA markers are the appropriate targets when dealing with systematic-taxonomic and phylogenetic aspects, as well as for molecular characterization of species by haplotyping, (ii) mtDNA markers are more convenient for population and intraspecific variability studies and (iii) both rDNA and mtDNA markers may be used for the classification of specimens (Bargues et al 2011a). The 18S sequence of L. diaphana (1848 bp) is slightly longer than that of G. truncatula (1,843 bp) (Bargues et al 1997), equally long than that of L. humilis (1,848 bp) (Bargues et al 2011a), similar to that of the European stagnicolines L. stagnalis, O. glabra and L. (S.) palustris, the radicines R. auricularia and R. balthica, as well as to P. columella (ranging between 1,849-1,852 bp) (Bargues et al 1997(Bargues et al , 2011b, but pronouncedly shorter than that of L. cubensis, L. viatrix and L. neotropica (all three 1,860-bp long) (Bargues et al 2007). This suggests that L. diaphana may be considered an old species within the family Lymnaeidae, according to their phylogeny in which the oldest lymnaeid fossil known is Galba from the Jurassic (zilch 1959(zilch -1960(zilch , Inaba 1969), a shorter sequence would be the plesiomorphic condition and an increase in sequence length would have occurred during lymnaeid evolution .…”