Cargando…

A commentary on the practice of using the so-called typeless species

Abstract. The fears expressed by Santos et al. (2016) that description of typeless species (new species described based on field photographs) can be fatal for the practice of taxonomy which will succumb to an uncontrollable stream of “species of questionable delimitation” are, in our opinion, exagge...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shatalkin, Anatoly I., Galinskaya, Tatiana V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Pensoft Publishers 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5672740/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29133994
http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.693.10945
Descripción
Sumario:Abstract. The fears expressed by Santos et al. (2016) that description of typeless species (new species described based on field photographs) can be fatal for the practice of taxonomy which will succumb to an uncontrollable stream of “species of questionable delimitation” are, in our opinion, exaggerated. The Code already protects taxonomic practice from subjectivity quite well by limiting opportunities for descriptions of new species based on field photos by rigid requirements, and only skilled taxonomists with extensive knowledge of a group are capable of fulfilling them. If a taxonomist has omitted to compare the new typeless species with the known species externally similar to it, the latter cannot be diagnosed and its name in that case becomes nomen nudum. Typeless species can coincide with species described earlier, but can represent a new species differing in internal features. To describe typeless species without infringement of Article 13.1 a taxonomist should compare this species to all related and similar species described earlier.