Skip to main content

The pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis


The freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis has a long research history, but only relatively recently has it emerged as an attractive model organism to study molecular mechanisms in the areas of developmental biology and translational medicine such as learning/memory and neurodegenerative diseases. The species has the advantage of being a hermaphrodite and can both cross- and self-mate, which greatly facilitates genetic approaches. The establishment of body-handedness, or chiromorphogenesis, is a major topic of study, since chirality is evident in the shell coiling. Chirality is maternally inherited, and only recently a gene-editing approach identified the actin-related gene Lsdia1 as the key handedness determinant. This short article reviews the natural habitat, life cycle, major research questions and interests, and experimental approaches.

Natural habitat and life cycle

Lymnaea stagnalis is a freshwater snail, commonly known as the great pond snail. It belongs to the phylum Mollusca, class Gastropoda and family Lymnaeidae [1,2,3]. It is widely distributed in freshwater habitats over large parts of Europe, North America and Asia except its most southern region [4]. L. stagnalis prefers living in waters that flow slowly or in stagnant water bodies and occupies shallow pond margins with dense vegetation where it usually feeds on algae or decaying plants. It turns carnivorous at times and preys on newts and small-sized fish or its peer snails. It is a pulmonate and thus, in addition to the usual inhale/exhale oxygen from water, it breathes with its lungs by moving frequently to the surface to inhale air [3]. This trait allows adaptation to oxygen-poor environments.

Although hermaphroditic, sexually mature L. stagnalis prefer cross-fertilization as is common in the freshwater pulmonates [5]. They can perform both female and male roles in mating. Copulation behavior and reproductive biology have been reviewed elsewhere [6, 7]. The snails lay eggs on weeds and other pond objects in large masses of about 2–6 cm, and which contain 50–120 eggs. Each egg, dark/intense yellow in color, measures about 100 μm in diameter, and is contained in an oval-shaped capsule (Fig. 1). Adult snails are 3–5 and 2–3 cm in shell length and width, respectively. Their size depends on the volume of water [3], with larger individuals found in large ponds [3]. The snail bodies are yellowish grey. Adults’ shells are yellow–brown in color, while immature/young snails have more translucent shells.

Fig. 1

Adult snails and lifecycle. Sinistral (a) and dextral (b) snails reared in our group, and lifecycle showing images at the representative stages (c)

Field collection and lab culture

Strains of L. stagnalis are kept in many laboratories around the world for various biological research purposes. One of the unique features of L. stagnalis is that it displays both coiling directions in the wild, 98% right-handed (dextral) and 2% left-handed coiling (sinistral) with the rare sinistral strains maintained by a few groups. We have established pure dextral and sinistral strains from snails kindly given to us by Dr. Guss Smit (Free University, The Netherlands), which we have been rearing for over 15 years [8]. They are maintained in water-circulating tanks, under a 16-h light/8-h darkness cycle, at a set temperature of 20–22 °C. They are fed with pet food for tropical fish and lettuce when young and mainly with lettuce after they grow up (Fig. 1a, b). The sizes of the laboratory-reared snails and their egg masses (and thus the number of egg capsules in each egg mass) are much smaller than those in the wild. Detailed procedures for maintaining adults and culturing embryos [1, 2] and characteristics of the early developmental stages have been described for Lymnaeidae [1,2,3]. L. stagnalis is quoted as living at least 1 year on average, sometimes longer, from 2 to 5 years [3]. Its lifespan is generally 6–12 months in our laboratory. Photographs of representative developmental stages are shown in Fig. 1c.

Major interests and research questions

Evolutionary aspects

Lymnaea stagnalis is one of the representatives of Spiralia, a morphologically diverse clade of protostome animals, including Mollusca (to which L. stagnalis belongs), Annelids, Platyhelminths and other taxa. Spiral cleavage is typically observed in this clade, but it is not unique to protostomes nor adopted by all members of the Spiralia [9, 10]. Thus, this group represents an excellent system for comparative studies to understand the origins of such diversity from a seemingly common ground plan [9]. With the advent of increasing genome sequence data and new molecular and functional experimental approaches in several species, spiralian phylogeny is now being revisited and reviewed [10].

Chiromorphogenesis during development

Although most animals exhibit approximate anatomical bilateral symmetry externally, the internal organs display significant left–right asymmetry in terms of their shape and location. Mechanisms governing initiation and maintenance of this asymmetry are strictly controlled genetically. What, when, where and how is the chirality of the individual organism determined during development? Mechanisms underlying the left–right determination process have been intensively investigated in both vertebrates and invertebrates [11,12,13,14,15, and references therein]. Although similar signaling cascades are conserved among vertebrates and invertebrates, the onset of L–R establishment seems to vary among deuterostomes. The very recent work on L. stagnalis [16] is the first and still only the case in the animal kingdom to show at the molecular level that the handedness is already determined as early as the non-cleaved fertilized-egg stage.

Lymnaea stagnalis is an ideal target to answer these fundamental biological questions. Although genetic knowledge and experimental techniques for snails are limited compared with model animals such as C.(Caenorhabditis) elegans and Drosophila, L. stagnalis has unique advantages such as hermaphroditism, and a maternal mode of chirality inheritance [17]. The maternal mode of inheritance was proposed in 1923 for Radix peregra (previously known as Lymnaea peregra), an aquatic pulmonate gastropod in the same family Lymnaeidae [18, 19]. For Lymnaea stagnalis, chirality determination by a maternal single gene locus was indicated experimentally [15, 20, 21], and later decisively proven by genome editing [16]. The clockwise (CW) and anti-clockwise (ACW) micromere rotation at the 3rd cleavage (from the four- to the eight-cell stage) for the dextral and the sinistral embryos, respectively, was the earliest sign of chirality observed [22]. Asymmetric expression of nodal/Pitx genes was known to regulate asymmetric location/morphology of organs in vertebrates, and the genes were found to function in this snail as well [8, 16, 23, 24]. Surprisingly, the mechanical micro-manipulation of embryos at the third cleavage of L. stagnalis to reverse the rotation direction resulted in the expression sites of the nodal/Pitx genes at the mirror-imaged positions and produced healthy mirror-imaged animals (dextralized-sinistral and sinistralized-dextral snails). Their self-crossed offspring reverted naturally to the original handedness [8]. It is clear from this work that the relative location of the four micromeres and four macromeres at the 8-cell stage is definitive for handedness determination. During the course of the crucial third cleavage, the mirror symmetry relationship between the dominant dextral and recessive sinistral embryos is broken, as SD (spiral deformation) and SI (spindle inclination) are observed only for the dextral embryos (Fig. 2). Although these chiral cytoskeletal dynamics were shown to be strongly linked to the handedness-determining gene [17, 20, 25], they are auxiliary to give robustness to the chiral cell cleavage [8, 26]. Their loss does not change the chirality [8]. Chirality is determined by lsdia1 already at the fertilized-cell stage and is firmly established at the eight-cell stage through the micromere–macromere contacts [8, 16]. These aspects are crucial to understanding the molecular process of handedness determination.

Fig. 2

Adapted from [20]

3D-reconstruction images of embryos in metaphase/anaphase and in telophase. Animal-view (top) and the corresponding lateral-view (bottom) images of embryos that are double-stained for filamentous actin (green, Alexa 488-phalloidin) and β-tubulin (red, Cy3-anti-β-tubulin antibody) of the dextral embryos. Arrows indicate SD (spiral deformation). Scale bar equals 20 μm. A schematic drawing to show the formation of micromeres from respective macromeres is shown. Confocal images were obtained with a laser scanning confocal microscope (Zeiss LSM 510). 3D-reconstruction images were made from a z-series of optical sections acquired every 0.80 μm.

Identification of the single handedness-determining gene

A maternal effect gene which is different between the sinistral and the dextral strains was initially identified as a candidate using positional cloning independently in 2016, by Davison et al. as “associated” [21] and by Kuroda et al. as “the strongest candidate” gene [15]. Neither study proved that the gene is in fact the handedness-determining gene. Kuroda et al. kept their gene naming of Lsdia1 and Lsdia2, which correspond to Davison et al.’s Ldia2 and Ldia1, respectively, because Davison et al.’s published gene and inferred protein sequences are different in key aspects from Lsdia1/2 [26, 27]. There are tandemly repeated formin-related diaphanous genes, Lsdia1 and Lsdia2, and a point mutation was found in both alleles of Lsdia1 for the sinistral strains [15]. This abrogates expression of full-length LsDia1 protein, which is normally present already at the one-cell stage of the dextral embryos. No localization of Lsdia1 nor Lsdia2 mRNA was observed within a cell at the 1-cell stage, nor among blastomeres in the 2- or 4-cell stages [15, 26], although different results have been reported [21] (see “Experimental approaches” below for detail). Knocking out of Lsdia1 in the dextral snail eggs using the CRISPR/Cas9 technique gave clear-cut results leading to the unequivocal identification of Lsdia1 as the handedness-determining gene [16], which has been sought for nearly a century. Biallelic frameshift mutations introduced into the gene produced sinistrally coiled offspring generation after generation in the otherwise totally dextral genetic background. The gene sets the chirality already at the one-cell stage by twisting blastomeres either CW or ACW at the first cleavage, the earliest observed symmetry-breaking event linked directly to body-handedness in the animal kingdom [16]. The early intracellular chirality is superseded by the intercellular chirality during the third cleavage, leading to asymmetric expression of nodal and Pitx and then to organismal body-handedness [8]. Remarkably, all these characteristics at various developmental stages match with Lsdia1 genotypes without exception, showing that the single gene dictates the handedness directly or indirectly across the biological hierarchy. This is the first successful germline transmission of a CRISPR/Cas9-edited gene in Mollusca [16, 26].


The molluscan shells have a broad diversity in terms of morphology, sizes, and ornamentations, as realized during the course of evolution. The molecular basis of the shell development is an intriguing and fundamental question. Shells consist of calcium carbonate and are typical examples of biominerals. In the area of shell development, L. stagnalis also serves as a model animal. The conserved early cell movements associated with initiation of shell construction have been observed [28]. The shells of gastropods have chirality, i.e., a spiral shape around a central axis. Asymmetric and mirror image patterns of the decapentaplegic (dpp) expression in the mantle edge between the dextral and sinistral lineages of L. stagnalis have been reported [29]. More recently, relevant asymmetrically expressed molluscan shell matrix proteins (SMPs) were found using proteomic and transcriptomic datasets in the left and right sides of mantle tissue [30, 31]. Recent exciting methodological developments available to the molecular biologist open a new channel for communication between biologists and mineralogists with common interests in a variety of aspects of biomineralization, ranging from structural biology to evo-devo, to material properties and beyond [32, 33].


The relatively simple central nervous system (CNS) of Lymnaea, with its large and identifiable neurons, has facilitated its adoption as a major model in neurophysiology and psychology research, for learning and memory studies [34]. The neurons are accessible for detailed electrophysiological, biophysical, biochemical, and molecular studies [35,36,37]. Unlike D. melanogaster and C. elegans which are the most common and best characterized invertebrate models, Lymnaea has a relatively long life span which allows the study of age-related modifications involving genetic, molecular, and cellular mechanisms, and which usually take time to manifest their full effects [38, 39]. Using food-reward classical conditioning experiments, the crosstalk between neuronal metabolism and the formation and the maintenance of long-term memory and how such mechanisms are altered during ageing have been investigated. For example, insulin and IGF-1 [40,41,42,43], NO-cGMP signaling [44] and CREB [45] have been reported to modulate aspects of plasticity in the CNS of Lymnaea and enhance learning abilities in older learning-impaired snails. These findings resonate well with the growing evidence suggesting a role for insulin-like peptides and insulin resistance in human ageing [46, 47]. The CNS of adult L. stagnalis is capable of spontaneous regeneration following neuronal injury. Thus, L. stagnalis could serve as a valuable animal model in which to study the cellular mechanisms underlying neuronal regeneration [48, 49].

Lymnaea also provides an attractive platform to investigate human neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s [42, 50]. Several genes relevant in aging and neurodegenerative/other diseases were found to be evolutionary conserved in L. stagnalis [50], and a direct link between administration of β-amyloid (Aβ) and loss of consolidated LTM (long-term memory) was observed in L. stagnalis as in humans [51]. In addition to the relatively long lifespan, the animal has another great advantage for neuroscience research, namely it lacks a blood–brain barrier [51]. Consequently, for example in dementia studies, it is not necessary to apply Aβ directly to the brain tissue. Thus, the Aβ concentration can be kept low and well controlled for each individual animal. Aβ-induced memory loss and electrophysiological changes can be studied in the absence of neuronal death in a defined network underlying associative memory. Interestingly, both the behavioral and neuronal effects were reported to depend upon the animals having been classically conditioned prior to treatment, since Aβ application before training caused neither memory impairment nor underlying neuronal changes over a comparable time period [51].

Lymnaea stagnalis may offer to translational medicine a powerful new tool to study age-related diseases of the nervous system by identifying new molecular targets for the development of innovative therapeutic strategies, and by enabling the screening of large numbers of compounds for drug activity. Moreover, the snail system does not have the serious ethical and economic issues associated with the animal models currently most frequently used in screening, i.e., rats, mice and primates [39].


Lymnaea stagnalis serves as the intermediate host for more than one hundred species of digenetic trematodes, including the avian schistosome Trichobilharzia szidati, a causative agent of cercarial dermatitis in humans (Fig. 3) [52]. A more serious disease is human schistosomiasis caused by several different parasites including Schistosoma mansoni for which the freshwater snail Biomphalaria (B.) glabrata is the specific intermediate host. Schistosomiasis continues to affect the health of 220 million people around the world. The World Health Organization lists schistosomiasis as one of the “Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs)” [53]. Considerable effort has been invested over several decades to understand the immunological responses of B. glabrata to various microorganisms. As a consequence, a large number of immune- and stress-responsive genes and gene products have been documented, but most of them need to be functionally verified [54]. As B. glabrata and L. stagnalis are phylogenetically closely related, the recent application of CRISPR–Cas9-mediated genome editing to Lymnaea [16] should allow functional characterization of these immune-related genes [55, 56].

Fig. 3

Life cycle of parasite avian schistosome Trichobilharzia szidati which involves L. stagnalis as an intermediate host.: Cercarial dermatitis in humans is caused by the parasite. Adapted and modified from


Lymnaea stagnalis is also a popular model organism for studies of ecotoxicology [57, 58] and a bioindicator of aquatic contaminants [57]. Toxicity studies using L. stagnalis began to appear in the late the 1970s, however, it is after the late 1990s that a great number of toxicological investigations focused on the sensitivity to metals, e.g., aluminum, mercury, cadmium, and particularly to lead [59]. In recent years, several works addressing the environmental risk assessment of chemicals (tributyltin and coal tar) and micro-plastics, were published also using this snail [60,61,62]. L. stagnalis has been accepted as a standard test organism for ecotoxicological studies with an OECD guideline for a reproduction test (OECD, 2016).

Experimental approaches


In Lymnaea, the forward genetics approach has been used to identify candidate genes including the gene determining left–right shell coiling [15,16,17,18,19, 21] (see “Chiromorphogenesis during development” section). We have constructed F10 congenic lines by continuous backcrossing and searched for recombinant individuals [15, 17]. These were possible as L. stagnalis is prolific, however, creating linkage markers was not easy due to lack of an annotated genome database. Thus far, the methods using AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism) and RAD (restriction-site associated DNA) markers have been effective [15, 63]. We constructed a BAC library of the right coiling strain and sequenced the handedness-determining locus by chromosome walking [15], but mapping using draft genomic data [21] may also be possible.

Embryological manipulations

For many experimental protocols, embryos must be taken out of the egg capsule prior to various treatments. Egg mass is collected from the aquarium maintaining the adult snails, and the egg capsules are isolated by rolling the egg mass on a sheet of filter paper to remove the surrounding jelly. Egg capsules are cultured in 1.5 × HF (Holtfretter’s) solution [16]. Eggs can be easily removed from the capsule using tweezers, and cultured in 5 × HF solution.

Microinjection of a liquid into early L. stagnalis embryos is not easy but possible. Eggs are pretreated with dithiothreitol (DTT) for a short period of time before microinjection in order to weaken the tough vitellin egg membrane. Careful DTT treatment is essential, as developmental abnormalities are often observed when embryos experience prolonged DTT treatment. The eggs are transferred to a droplet of injection buffer on the sample stage. A micropipette is filled with relevant reagents such as mRNAs in nuclease-free water with Lucifer yellow as a marker dye and forced into embryos rapidly by positive pressure with an injector (Fig. 4a). In the authors’ laboratory, microinjections are performed using a micromanipulator (MN-4, Narishige), motor-drive microinjector (IM-30, Narishige) and inverted fluorescent microscope (Nikon TE300) (Fig. 4a). After the injection, embryos are transferred into glass capillary tubes and are cultured until they develop into juvenile snails (Fig. 4e). Juveniles are transferred to small aquaria and reared to adults. Details of embryo manipulations have been published in Refs [8, 15, 64].

Fig. 4

adapted from [64]

Injection of fluorescent protein mRNA for cell-lineage tracing in L. stagnalis embryos. Standard setup for microinjection (a), schematic diagram of the experiment showing an injection to one cell at the two-cell stage (b), and fluorescent images of embryos where half of the cells are expressing DsRed-Express at the 8-cell (c, right panel) and blastula (d, right panel) stages; bright-field images (c and d, left panel) are also included. The exposure time for the fluorescence image capture was 4 s (c) or 2 s (d). Scale bar 100 μm. For other types of experiments, embryos after microinjection were cultured in a capillary tube. 4e shows a juvenile snail (encircled) cultured inside a capillary. bd are

Whole-mount in situ hybridization

Whole-mount in situ hybridization (WISH) is a common technique used for visualizing the location of expressed RNAs in embryos. Based on protocols for the sea water snail Patella vulgata [65], those for L. stagnalis have been developed to discriminate RNAs even from genes exhibiting 89.4% sequence identity [8, 15]. Appropriate controls must be carried out to avoid misleading conclusions caused by artifacts. For example, caution should be exercised with ‘within-capsule’ fixing procedures (in which the embryo is not removed from its capsule), with which remarkable asymmetric localization for the transcripts of housekeeping genes, β-actin and β-tubulin, was observed [26], just like the asymmetric expression of dia genes in the literature [21]. Standard outside capsule protocols, on the other hand, do not give any localization for β-actin, β-tubulin, Lsdia1 nor Lsdia2 genes [15, 25]. β-tubulin showed the homogeneous presence of the mRNA from the 1-cell stage before the first polar body extrusion [15], although it was previously reported undetected by WISH [66].

Immuno-staining and Western blotting

Immunostaining has been applied to visualize spindle architecture in the sea water snail Illyanassa using fluorophore-conjugated anti-β-tubulin antibodies [67]. Figure 2 shows representative images of double staining of filamentous actin and microtubules of L. stagnalis [20]. Western blot analyses for L. stagnalis clearly showed that LsDia1 protein is present in the dextral embryos from the 1-cell stage immediately after oviposition to the blastula stage, but is not detectable at any stage for the sinistral embryos [15]. For these experiments, 50–100 embryos of similar developmental stage are needed to provide sufficient extract for analysis.

Drug inhibition

Drug inhibition experiments can provide information on the functions of target proteins. For most experiments on L. stagnalis, drugs can be applied to eggs within the capsules. However, if timing is critical and a delay of drug delivery to the capsules and embryos does matter, then decapsulated eggs should be used. If inhibitor drug is not easily soluble in aqueous solution, DMSO can be added up to 0.3% concentration without apparent effect on L. stagnalis [15, 20]. Inhibition of actin or tubulin polymerization by latrunculin A and nocodazole, respectively, revealed that SD and SI are introduced by actin and not by microtubules [20]. Similarly, GSK3β inhibition by the highly specific 1-azakenpaullone (AZ) and by LiCl revealed a short sensitive period from the 2- to 4-cell stage which induces a subsequent dramatic developmental delay and alteration of the cleavage patterns of blastomeres at the fifth cleavage (16- to 24-cell stage) [68].

In general, it is important to check the drug’s specificity and the drug or solvent lethality. Two independent inhibition studies on L. stagnalis early embryos using the anti-formin drug SMIFH2 gave different conclusions. One showed 100% lethality at concentrations higher than 10 µM regardless of the timing of drug application [15, 25], whereas the other used 100 µM [21, 26]. Statistics should be checked on the ratio of dead/tested embryos in comparison with control experiments to avoid focusing on a rarely observed phenotype. A similar point was raised about drug inhibition experiments on the freshwater gastropods B. glabrata and L. stagnalis using Dorsomorphin and SB431542, respectively. In both cases, it was found that the main impact on gastropod embryogenesis was lethality and not phenotypic changes to shell development [69].

Overexpression and knock-down

In vitro-synthesized mRNA expression is important for the understanding of molecular mechanisms during development. Expression of in vitro-synthesized mRNAs in Lymnaea stagnalis was shown to be possible for the first time by micro-injecting the mRNAs of fluorescent proteins, mCherry, DsRed-Express, and enhanced green fluorescent protein into the eggs before the first polar body stage. They are expressed and fluorescence was detected within a few hours of injection [64] (Fig. 4b–d). The distribution of β-Catenin in vivo by micro-injecting GFP-tagged β-catenin [70], live F-actin using a GFP fusion of the actin-binding domain of utrophin and live microtubules using GFP or RFP fusions of the MT binding domain of ensconsin [71] were followed in the seawater snail Crepidula fornicata.

In L. stagnalis, RNAi knock-down experiments have been reported in adult snails that disrupt neuronal nitric oxide synthase gene function [72]. As functional analysis by morpholino was successful in sea snails [70, 73], this method may also be applicable to L. stagnalis.

CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing

CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing allows for a more targeted analysis of gene function [74]. This technique has been applied to a variety of organisms including non-model animals, however, mosaicism is the serious obstacle at F0, particularly when the method is used in embryos [16, 75, 76]. Functional analyses must be carried out at F1 where homogeneity in somatic cells of the whole body is realized. In this regard, hermaphroditism and the ability to perform both cross- and self-mating in L. stagnalis are a great advantage for CRISPR work. Specifically, homozygous and heterozygous knockout F1 snails can be obtained by self-crossing of a F0 snail, which was microinjected with Cas9 mRNA and guide RNA at the one-cell stage in a manner described in Embryological Manipulations. Self-fertilization of heterozygous knockout F1 can establish F2 of particular genotype with the otherwise identical genetic background. These lines can be retained generation after generation [16]. In the total of four experiments, 39 injected embryos were cultured. Ten F0 adult snails were obtained (26%), five of which showed germline transmission to the F1 generation [16]. Practice is needed for successful microinjection (Fig. 4a, b) and exo ovo culturing (Fig. 4e) of embryos [8, 16], however, the most demanding part may be the individual breeding and rearing of many snails.

Transgenic snails have not yet been produced, although several techniques have been developed in mollusca but not yet used for functional assays [77,78,79]. The possibility to generate a knock-in snail line using the CRISPR technique was indicated for a sea water snail, where transient transgenic expression was achieved [80]. This may be a future direction to pursue, to enable live imaging of target gene products.

Research community and resources

MolluscDB [81], a GenomeHubs database for Mollusca, has been built and the STAGIG genome sequencing project for L. stagnalis has been launched. An early version of the data has been published [21] and publication of the annotated sequence data is eagerly awaited. There is a Lymnaea stagnalis Sequencing Consortium web site ( Table 1 summarizes the latest data bases.

Table 1 Resource/database available for L. stagnalis research

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.



Glycogen synthase kinase 3β


Dimethyl sulfoxide


Green fluorescent protein


Red fluorescent protein


Nitric oxide


Guanosine 3′,5′-cyclic monophosphate


Cyclic AMP-responsive element binding protein


Central nervous system


  1. 1.

    Morrill JB. Development of the pulmonate gastropod lymnaea. In: Ronald RC, Frederick WH, Alan R, editors. Developmental biology of freshwater invertebrate. New York: Liss Inc.; 1982. p. 399–483.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Morrill JB. Cellular patterns and morphogenesis in early development of freshwater pulmonate snails, Lymnaea and Physa (Gastropoda, Mollusca). In: Adiyodi KG, Adiyodi RG, editors. Reproductive biology of invertebrates, progress in developmental biology, vol. 7. New York: Wiley; 1998. p. 67–107.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Meshcheryakov VN. The common pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis. In: Dettlaff TA, Vassetzky SG, editors. Animal species for developmental studies Invertebrates, vol. 1. New York: Consultants Bureau; 1990. p. 69–132.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Hubendick B. Recent Lymnaeidae Their variation, morphology, taxonomy, nomenclature, and distribution. Kungl Svenska Vetensk Akad Handl. 1951;3:1–223.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Van Duivenboden YA, Ter Maat A. Mating behaviour of Lymnaea stagnalis. Malacologia. 1988;28:53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Koene JM, Ter Maa A. Coolidge effect in pond snails: male motivation in a simultaneous hermaphrodite. BMC Evol Biol. 2007;7:212.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Van Duivenboden YA, Pieneman A, Ter Maat A. Multiple mating suppresses fecundity in the hermaphrodite freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis: a laboratory study. Anim Behav. 1985;33:1184–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Kuroda R, Endo B, Abe M, Shimizu M. Chiral blastomere arrangement dictates zygotic left-right asymmetry pathway in snails. Nature. 2009;462(7274):790–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Henry JQ. Spiralian model systems. Int J Dev Biol. 2014;58(6–8):389–401.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Martín-Durán JM, Marlétaz F. Unravelling spiral cleavage. Development. 2020;147(1):181081.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Vandenberg LN, Levin M. Far from solved: a perspective on what we know about early mechanisms of left-right asymmetry. Dev Dyn. 2010;239:3131–46.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Nakamura T, Hamada H. Left-right patterning: conserved and divergent mechanisms. Development. 2012;139:3257–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Blum M, Schweickert A, Vick P, Wright CV, Danilchik MV. Symmetry breakage in the vertebrate embryo: when does it happen and how does it work? Dev. Biol. 2014;393:109–23.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Coutelis JB, González-Morales N, Géminard C, Noselli S. Diversity and convergence in the mechanisms establishing L/R asymmetry in metazoa. EMBO Rep. 2014;15:926–37.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Kuroda R, Fujikura K, Abe M, Hosoiri Y, Asakawa S, Shimizu M, Umeda S, Ichikawa F, Takahashi H. Diaphanous gene mutation affects spiral cleavage and chirality in snails. Sci Rep. 2016;6:34809.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Abe M, Kuroda R. The development of CRISPR for a mollusc establishes the formin Lsdia1 as the long-sought gene for snail dextral/sinistral coiling. Development. 2019;146(9):dev175976.

  17. 17.

    Kuroda R. How a single gene twists a snail. Integr Comp Biol. 2014;54:677–87.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Boycott AE, Diver C. On the inheritance of sinistrality in Limnaea peregra. Proc R Soc Lond B. 1923;95:207–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Sturtevant AH. Inheritance of direction of coiling in Lymnaea. Science. 1923;58:269–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Shibazaki Y, Shimizu M, Kuroda R. Body handedness is directed by genetically determined cytoskeletal dynamics in the early embryo. Curr Biol. 2004;14(16):1462–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Davison A, McDowell GS, Holden JM, Johnson HF, Koutsovoulos GD, Liu MM, Hulpiau P, Van Roy F, Wade CM, Banerjee R, Yang F, Chiba S, Davey JW, Jackson DJ, Levin M, Blaxter ML. Formin is associated with left-right asymmetry in the pond snail and the frog. Curr Biol. 2016;26(5):654–60.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Crampton HE. Reversal of cleavage in a sinistral gastropod. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1894;8:167–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Grande C, Patel NH. Lophotrochozoa get into the game: the nodal pathway and left/right asymmetry in bilateria. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2009;74:281–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Grande C, Patel NH. Nodal signalling is involved in left-right asymmetry in snails. Nature. 2009;457(7232):1007–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Kuroda R. A twisting story: how a single gene twists a snail? Mechanogenetics. Q. Rev. Biophys. 2015;48:445–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Kuroda R, Abe M. Response to ‘Formin, an opinion’. Development. 2020;147(1):dev187435.

  27. 27.

    Davison A, McDowell GS, Holden JM, Johnson HF, Wade CM, Chiba S, Jackson DJ, Levin M, Blaxter ML. Formin, an opinion. Development. 2020;147(1):dev187427.

  28. 28.

    Hohagen J, Jackson DJ. An ancient process in a modern mollusc: early development of the shell in lymnaea stagnalis. BMC Developmental Biol. 2013;13:27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Shimizu K, Iijima M, Setiamarga DH, Sarashina I, Kudoh T, Asami T, Gittenberger E, Endo K. Left-right asymmetric expression of dpp in the mantle of gastropods correlates with asymmetric shell coiling. Evodevo. 2013;4(1):15.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Herlitze I, Marie B, Marin F, Jackson DJ. Molecular modularity and asymmetry of the molluscan mantle revealed by a gene expression atlas. Gigascience. 2018;7(6):giy056.

  31. 31.

    Ishikawa A, Shimizu K, Isowa Y, Takeuchi T, Zhao R, Kito K, Fujie M, Satoh N, Endo K. Functional shell matrix proteins tentatively identified by asymmetric snail shell morphology. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):9768.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Jackson DJ, Degnan BM. The importance of evo-devo to an integrated understanding of molluscan biomineralisation. J Struct Biol. 2016;196(2):67–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Clark MS. Molecular mechanisms of biomineralization in marine invertebrates. J Exp Biol. 2020;223(Pt 11):jeb206961.

  34. 34.

    Dalesman S, Karnik V, Lukowiak K. Sensory mediation of memory blocking stressors in the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis. J Exp Biol. 2011;214:2528–33.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Ito E, Kobayashi S, Kojima S, Sadamoto H, Hatakeyama D. Associative learning in the pond snail. Lymnaea stagnalis. Zool Sci. 1999;16:711–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Feng ZP, Zhang Z, van Kesteren RE, Straub VA, van Nierop P, Jin K, Nejatbakhsh N, Goldberg JI, Spencer GE, Yeoman MS, Wildering W, Coorssen JR, Croll RP, Buck LT, Syed NI, Smit AB. Transcriptome analysis of the central nervous system of the mollusc Lymnaea stagnalis. BMC Genomics. 2009;10:451.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Kemenes G, Benjamin PR. Lymnaea. Curr Biol. 2009;19(1):R9–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Nestler EJ, Hyman SE. Animal models of neuropsychiatric disorders. Nat Neurosci. 2010;13:1161–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Tascedda F, Malagoli D, Accorsi A, Rigillo G, Blom JM, Ottaviani E. Molluscs as models for translational medicine. Med Sci Monit Basic Res. 2015;21:96–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Kojima S, Sunada H, Mita K, Sakakibara M, Lukowiak K, Ito E. Function of insulin in snail brain in associative learning. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2015;201(10):969–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Totani Y, Aonuma H, Oike A, Watanabe T, Hatakeyama D, Sakakibara M, Lukowiak K, Ito E. Monoamines, insulin and the roles they play in associative learning in pond snails. Front Behav Neurosci. 2019;13:65.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Murakami J, Okada R, Sadamoto H, Kobayashi S, Mita K, Sakamoto Y, Yamagishi M, Hatakeyama D, Otsuka E, Okuta A, Sunada H, Takigami S, Sakakibara M, Fujito Y, Awaji M, Moriyama S, Lukowiak K, Ito E. Involvement of insulin-like peptide in long-term synaptic plasticity and long-term memory of the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis. J Neurosci. 2013;33(1):371–83.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Pirger Z, Naskar S, László Z, Kemenes G, Reglődi D, Kemenes I. Reversal of age-related learning deficiency by the vertebrate PACAP and IGF-1 in a novel in-vertebrate model of aging: the pond snail (Lymnaea stagnalis). J Gerontol. 2014;69:1331–8.

  44. 44.

    Kemenes I, Kemenes G, Andrew RJ, Benjamin PR, O’Shea M. Critical time-window for NO-cGMP-dependent long-term memory formation after one-trial appetitive conditioning. J Neurosci. 2002;22(4):1414–25.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Sadamoto H, Sato H, Kobayashi S, Murakami J, Aonuma H, Ando H, Fujito Y, Hamano K, Awaji M, Lukowiak K, Urano A, Ito E. CREB in the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis: cloning, gene expression, and function in identifiable neurons of the central nervous system. J Neurobiol. 2004;58(4):455–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Alcedo J, Flatt T, Pasyukova EG. Neuronal inputs and outputs of aging and longevity. Front Genet. 2013;4:71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Rivi V, Benatti C, Colliva C, Radighieri G, Brunello N, Tascedda F, Blom JMC. Lymnaea stagnalis as model for translational neuroscience research: from pond to bench. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020;108:602–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Feng ZP, Klumperman J, Lukowiak K, Syed NI. In vitro synaptogenesis between the somata of identified Lymnaea neurons requires protein synthesis but not extrinsic growth factors or substrate adhesion molecules. J Neurosci. 1997;17:7839–49.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Aleksic M, Feng ZP. Identification of the role of C/EBP in neurite regeneration following microarray analysis of a L. stagnalis CNS injury model. BMC Neurosci. 2012;13:2.

  50. 50.

    Fodor I, Urbán P, Kemenes G, Koene JM, Pirger Z. Aging and disease-relevant gene products in the neuronal transcriptome of the great pond snail (Lymnaea stagnalis): a potential model of aging, age-related memory loss, and neurodegenerative diseases. Invert Neurosci. 2020;20(3):9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Ford L, Crossley M, Williams T, Thorpe JR, Serpell LC, Kemenes G. Effects of Aβ exposure on long-term associative memory and its neuronal mechanisms in a defined neuronal network. Sci Rep. 2015;5:10614.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Skála V, Walker AJ, Horák P. Snail defence responses to parasite infection: the Lymnaea stagnalis-Trichobilharzia szidati model. Dev Comp Immunol. 2020;102:103464.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

  54. 54.

    Famakinde DO. Treading the path towards genetic control of snail resistance to schistosome infection. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2018;3(3):E86.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Maier T, Wheeler NJ, Namigai EKO, Tycko J, Grewelle RE, Woldeamanuel Y, Klohe K, Perez-Saez J, Sokolow SH, De Leo GA, Yoshino TP, Zamanian M, Reinhard-Rupp J. Gene drives for schistosomiasis transmission control. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(12):e0007833.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Castillo MG, Humphries JE, Mourão MM, Marquez J, Gonzalez A, Montelongo CE. Biomphalaria glabrata immunity: post-genome advances. Dev Comp Immunol. 2020;104:103557.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Bouetard A, Besnard AL, Vassaux D, Lagadic L, Coutellec MA. Impact of the redox-cycling herbicide diquat on transcript expression and antioxidant enzymatic activities of the freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis. Aquatic Toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2013;126:256–65.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Amorim J, Abreu I, Rodrigues P, Peixoto D, Pinheiro C, Saraiva A, Carvalho AP, Guimarães L, Oliva-Teles L. Lymnaea stagnalis as a freshwater model invertebrate for ecotoxicological studies. Sci Total Environ. 2019;669:11–28.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Munley KM, Brix KV, Panlilio J, Deforest DK, Grosell M. Growth inhibition in early life-stage tests predicts full life-cycle toxicity effects of lead in the fresh-water pulmonate snail, Lymnaea stagnalis. Aquatic Toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2013;28–129:60–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Evelyn G Reátegui-Zirena, Christopher J Salice. Parental diet affects embryogenesis of the great pond snail (Lymnaea stagnalis) exposed to cadmium, pyraclostrobin, and tributyltin Environ Toxicol Chem. 2018;37(9):2428–38.

  61. 61.

    Horton AA, Newbold LK, Palacio-Cortés AM, Spurgeon DJ, Pereira MG, Carter H, Gweon HS, Vijver MG, van Bodegom PM, Navarro da Silva MA, Lahive E. Accumulation of polybrominated diphenyl ethers and microbiome response in the great pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis with exposure to nylon (polyamide) microplastics. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020;188:109882.

  62. 62.

    Bamze Attoumani R, de Vaufleury A, Crini N, Fatin-Rouge N. Assessing natural clays of a contaminated site to stabilize and reduce the ecotoxicity of a coal tar. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020;190:110081.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Liu MM, Davey JW, Banerjee R, Han J, Yang F, Aboobaker A, Blaxter ML, Davison A. Fine mapping of the pond snail left-right asymmetry (chirality) locus using RAD-Seq and fibre-FISH. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(8):e71067.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Abe M, Shimizu M, Kuroda R. Expression of exogenous fluorescent proteins in early freshwater pond snail embryos. Dev Genes Evol. 2009;219(3):167–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Nederbragt AJ, van Loon AE, Dictus WJ. Expression of Patella vulgata orthologs of engrailed and dpp-BMP2/4 in adjacent domains during molluscan shell development suggests a conserved compartment boundary mechanism. Dev. Biol. 2002;246:341–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Liu MM, Davey JW, Jackson DJ, Blaxter ML, Davison A. A conserved set of maternal genes? Insights from a molluscan transcriptome. Int J Dev Biol. 2014;58(6–8):501–11.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Lambert JD, Nagy LM. Asymmetric inheritance of centrosomally localized mRNAs during embryonic cleavages. Nature. 2002;420(6916):682–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Takahashi H, Abe M, Kuroda R. GSK3β controls the timing and pattern of the fifth spiral cleavage at the 2-4 cell stage in Lymnaea stagnalis. Dev Genes Evol. 2019;229(2–3):73–81.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Baynes A, Montagut Pino G, Duong GH, Lockyer AE, McDougall C, Jobling S, Routledge EJ. Early embryonic exposure of freshwater gastropods to pharmaceutical 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors results in a surprising open-coiled “banana-shaped” shell. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):16439.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Henry JQ, Perry KJ, Martindale MQ. β-catenin and early development in the gastropod, Crepidula fornicata. Integr Comp Biol. 2010;50(5):707–19.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Lyons DC, Perry KJ, Henry JQ. Spiralian gastrulation: germ layer formation, morphogenesis, and fate of the blastopore in the slipper snail Crepidula fornicata. Evodevo. 2015;6:24.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Korneev SA, Kemenes I, Straub V, Staras K, Korneeva EI, Kemenes G, Benjamin PR, O’Shea M. Suppression of nitric oxide (NO)-dependent behavior by double-stranded RNA-mediated silencing of a neuronal NO synthase gene. J Neurosci. 2002;22(11):RC227.

  73. 73.

    Rabinowitz JS, Chan XY, Kingsley EP, Duan Y, Lambert JD. Nanos is required in somatic blast cell lineages in the posterior of a mollusk embryo. Curr Biol. 2008;18(5):331–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science. 2012;337(6096):816–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Teboul L, Murray SA, Nolan PM. Phenotyping first-generation genome editing mutants: a new standard? Mamm Genome. 2017;28(7–8):377–82.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Mehravar M, Shirazi A, Nazari M, Banan M. Mosaicism in CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing. Dev Biol. 2019;445(2):156–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Lu JK, Chen TT, Allen SK, Matsubara T, Burns JC. Production of transgenic dwarf surfclams, Mulinia lateralis, with pantropic retroviral vectors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996;93(8):3482–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Tsai HJ, Lai CH, Yang HS. Sperm as a carrier to introduce an exogenous DNA fragment into the oocyte of Japanese abalone (Haliotis divorsicolor suportexta). Transgenic Res. 1997;6(1):85–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Chen J, Wu C, Zhang B, Cai Z, Wei L, Li Z, Li G, Guo T, Li Y, Guo W, Wang X. PiggyBac transposon-mediated transgenesis in the pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas)—first time in mollusks. Front Physiol. 2018;9:811.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Perry KJ, Henry JQ. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome modification in the mollusc. Crepidula fornicata. Genesis. 2015;53(2):237–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.


  82. 82.

    Schell T, Feldmeyer B, Schmidt H, Greshake B, Tills O, Truebano M, Rundle SD, Paule J, Ebersberger I, Pfenninger M. An annotated draft genome for Radix auricularia (Gastropoda, Mollusca). Genome Biol Evol. 2017;9:3.

  83. 83.

    Adema Coen M, et al. Whole genome analysis of a schistosomiasis-transmitting freshwater snail. Nat Commun. 2017;8:15451.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Davison A, Blaxter ML. An expressed sequence tag survey of gene expression in the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis, an intermediate vector of trematodes. Parasitology. 2005;130(Pt 5):539–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    Sadamoto H, Takahashi H, Okada T, Kenmoku H, Toyota M, Asakawa Y. De novo sequencing and transcriptome analysis of the central nervous system of mollusc Lymnaea stagnalis by deep RNA sequencing. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(8):e42546.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  86. 86.

    Bouétard A, Noirot C, Besnard AL, Bouchez O, Choisne D, Robe E, Klopp C, Lagadic L, Coutellec MA. Pyrosequencing-based transcriptomic resources in the pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis, with a focus on genes involved in molecular response to diquat-induced stress. Ecotoxicology. 2012;21(8):2222–34.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    Jehn J, Gebert D, Pipilescu F, Stern S, Kiefer JST, Hewel C, Rosenkranz D. PIWI genes and piRNAs are ubiquitously expressed in mollusks and show patterns of lineage-specific adaptation. Commun Biol. 2018;1:137.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information




RK wrote the paper and MA helped with literature searches. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reiko Kuroda.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kuroda, R., Abe, M. The pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis. EvoDevo 11, 24 (2020).

Download citation


  • Chiromorphogenesis
  • Spiral cleavage
  • Learning/memory
  • Neurodegenerative diseases
  • Schistosomiasis
  • CRISPR/Cas9