TAXONOMY: SPECIES CAN BE NAMED FROM PHOTOS

Reproducing palaeontological results depends on unrestricted access to fossils described in the literature, allowing others to reexamine or reinterpret them. Museums have policies and protocols for keeping materials in the public trust, but accessibility to privately owned fossil collections can be a problem. For example, the existence of an important early bat fossil in a private collection was long known, but it was only after a second specimen was acquired and made available by a museum that researchers published a description of it (N. B. Simmons et al. Nature 451, 818–821; 2008). Another example is the unique fossil of a supposed four-legged ‘snake’ , also privately owned, that was made temporarily available through a private German museum and then withdrawn after its description was published (D. M. Martill et al. We suggest that the enthusiasm of private collectors for their valuable and spectacular fossils should instead be harnessed by researchers, to the benefit of both parties. For example, scientists can invite collectors to participate in their projects and be co-authors on the publications (R. R. Reisz et al. — all on the condition that the specimen is donated to an institution with public right of access. Species can be named from photos As an international group of taxonomists who study a range of taxa, we consider that you misconstrued the case of a new insect species that was described on the basis of photographs (see Nature 535, 323–324; 2016). The species was described without a preserved type specimen, the individuals having escaped before preservation The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature allows for this — the authors (included here as signatories) followed the letter and the spirit of the Code, giving a description and a formal species name. It was based on material that supported their conclusions and an explanation of the circumstances to justify naming a species without an extant type. Peer reviewers judged the data sufficiently reliable to anchor a species name. As you point out, a physical specimen has features that might not be captured in a photo. However, types are name-bearers, not ” standards for species delimitation ” (D. S. Amorim et al. Significant knowledge about a species may build up before we can properly preserve a name-bearing type. The Code allows for the naming of those species. More than 90% of the planetary biota still awaits description. We need to adopt new technologies while recognizing that …