Abstract
Recently a correspondence in Zootaxa (Ceríaco et al., 2016) with more than 450 signatories including taxonomists, curators and other taxonomy users from all continents has received wide attention and has stimulated extensive discussion (a true buzz) around the possible interpretations of the Code (ICZN) about photography in taxonomy (Researchgate website link). This short note was necessary to recall the necessity of preserved specimens as vouchers for taxonomy, in response to photography-based taxonomy (PBT) as defended by Pape et al. (2016), and in a broad sense, for all the life sciences. This had been widely discussed and argued by Dubois & Nemésio (2007) who concluded on the importance of vouchers in taxonomy. But if the subject of these papers and discussions are about photography as the only way to document a new species, none of them discussed really what photography could represent in enhancing knowledge in natural sciences based on collections of specimens including type series and in association with other media (video and sound).
References
Amorim, D.S., Santos, C.M.D., Krell, F.-T., Dubois, A., Nihei, S.S., Oliveira, O.M.P., Pont, A., Song, H., Verdade, V.K., Fachin, D.A., Klassa, B., Lamas, C.J.E., Oliveira, S.S., De Carvalho, C.J.B., Mello-Patiu, C.A., Hajdu, E., Couri, M.S., Silva, V.C., Capellari, R.S., Falaschi, R.L., Feitosa, R.M., Prendini, L., Pombal Jr., J.P., Fernández, F., Rocha, R.M., Lattke, J.E., Caramaschi, U., Duarte, M., Marques, A.C., Reis, R.E., Kurina, O., Takiya, D.M., Tavares, M., Fernandes, D.S., Franco, F.L., Cuezzo, F., Paulson, D., Guénard, B., SchlickSteiner, B.C., Arthofer, W., Steiner, F.M., Fisher, B.L., Johnson, R.A., Delsinne, T.D., Donoso, D.A., Mulieri, P.R., Patitucci, L.D., Carpenter, J.M., Herman, L. & Grimaldi, D. (2016) Timeless standards for species delimitation. Zootaxa, 4137 (1), 121–128.
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4137.1.9Ang, Y., Wong, L.J. & Meier, R. (2013) Using seemingly unnecessary illustrations to improve the diagnostic usefulness of descriptions in taxonomy–a case study on Perochaeta orientalis (Diptera, Sepsidae). ZooKeys, 355, 9–27.
https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.355.6013Ceríacol, 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.4196.3.9Dubois, A. & Nemésio A. (2007) Does nomenclatural availability of nomina of new species or subspecies require the deposition of vouchers in collections? Zootaxa, 1409, 1–22.
Garrouste, R. & Roy, R. (2017) Note sur le comportement maternel de la Mante Paralygdamia madecassa Saussure & Zehntner, 1895 (Dictyoptera, Tarachodidae), endémique de Madacascar. Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France, 122 (1), 2017, 105–109.
Ineich, I., Glaw, F. & Vences, M. (2016) A new species of Blaesodactylus (Squamata : Gekkonidae) from Tsingy limestone outcrops in Namoroka National Park, north-western Madagascar. Zootaxa, 4109, 523–541.
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4109.5.2Pape, T. (2016) Taxonomy: species can be named from photos. Nature, 537, 307–307.
https://doi.org/10.1038/537307bWeirauch, C. & Frankenberg, S. (2015) From “insect soup” to biodiversity discovery: taxonomic revision of Peloridinannus Wygodzinsky, 1951 (Hemiptera: Schizopteridae), with description of six new species. Arthropod Systematics and Phylogeny, 73 (3), 457–475.