Thursday, September 15, 2016

New species name accepted without physical type specimen!

This is a very unusual case. I don't know how broad the ramifications are. But having a physical type specimen was always a requirement to get a new species name accepted by zoologists.  (Two exceptions I know of: a bird that was examined and blood taken, so DNA was retained as the type specimen, and then the bird was set free: and one case (there may be more) using trails on the seafloor as evidence for an unseen invertebrate.)  
Now we have a name accepted based on a photo with no DNA or body in hand.  Cryptozoologists should not start jumping up with photos of Bigfoot because there is a caveat: the specimens were trapped and observed closely while being photographed, but escaped. This could get interesting.   

3 comments:

Laurence Clark Crossen said...

If Bousfield and LeBlonde hear about this...
I tend to agree with Darren Naish [https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiym8qL6JvPAhWG14MKHd2HABAQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.scientificamerican.com%2Ftetrapod-zoology%2Fthe-cadborosaurus-wars%2F&usg=AFQjCNEa_t_XfMKQ0qcmCSYTD6zXPQBnEQ&bvm=bv.133178914,d.amc] that it is absurd to use a photograph for a type specimen.

Tech Revel said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mineah Syquia said...

Very best articles, I happy to read it, Beautiful nice and useful! Thank you very much.
Website