Abstract
A recent series of papers, and rebuttals, regarding Photography-based taxonomy (PBT) (Pape et al. 2016, Krell et al. 2016, Ceríaco et al. 2016, Thorpe 2017) has raised much controversy and discussion about the practice of describing new species without preserved type specimens. Although there has been thoughtful discussion upon this issue, there is still much misunderstanding, especially regarding the idea of changing parts of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999) to regulate this practice.
References
Ceríaco, L.M.P., Gutiérrez, E.E. & Dubois, A. (2016) Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences. Zootaxa, 4196 (3), 435–445.
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4196.3.9ICZN [International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature] (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 4th Edition. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, xxix + 306 pp.
Krell, F. (2016) Taxonomy: Preserve specimens for reproducibility. Nature, 539, 168.
https://doi.org/10.1038/539168bPape, T. (2016) Taxonomy: species can be named from photos. Nature, 537, 307.
https://doi.org/10.1038/537307bThorpe, S.E. (2017) Is photography-based taxonomy really inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences? A reply to Ceríaco et al. (2016). Zootaxa, 4226 (3), 449–450.
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4226.3.9