“…This variation has been evaluated in several taxonomic works; some (Blakemore, 2006; Michaelsen, 1900) considered the divergent forms as subspecies, others (Michaelsen, 1910, 1932; Omodeo, 1952, 1956; Plisko, 1965; Pop, 1952; Zicsi, 1960) considered them vaguely as “formae” or “varietates,” and finally others (Černosvitov, 1942; Michaelsen, 1932; Omodeo & Rota, 1989) considered them genetic mutations. However, (de Sosa, Marchán, Novo, Almodóvar, et al, 2017) showed that different positions of male pores have no phylogenetic basis. Length, weight and the number of segments also showed a high degree of variability, but no significant differences were found between lineages (de Sosa, Marchán, Novo, Almodóvar, et al, 2017).…”