The description of a new species without a preserved type specimen has always been permitted (T. Pape et al. Nature 537, 307; 2016) — but it should not become the norm. Original specimens allow testing of the hypotheses that underlie descriptions and so ensure reproducibility — an obligation and cornerstone of the scientific method.
It is taxonomic convention when describing a new species to deposit type specimens in a publicly accessible collection. This allows independent re-examination, reinterpretation and re-evaluation (Nature 535, 323–324; 2016). Although photographs can point to possible undescribed species and help to document biodiversity, they are open to misinterpretation (and also to manipulation).
Photographs alone should remain the exception, used only when specimens cannot be preserved for technical, legal or conservation reasons. Properly vouchered specimens are otherwise essential in biodiversity research, just as “laboratory notebooks and records must be available for independent review” in the experimental sciences (C. G. Begley et al. Nature 525, 25–27; 2015).
Author information
Author notes
- Frank T. Krell
*On behalf of 5 correspondents (see Supplementary information for a full list).
Affiliations
Denver Museum of Nature & Science, Colorado, USA.
- Frank T. Krell
Authors
Search for Frank T. Krell in:
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Frank T. Krell.
Supplementary information
PDF files
Rights and permissions
To obtain permission to re-use content from this article visit RightsLink.
About this article
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.