The nomenclatural implications of Gentile & Snell (2009)'s innovations in the designation of a type specimen - that is sampled and tagged but not killed - are discussed. The paper also responds to Nemésio (2009)'s criticism of Donegan (2008), where I argued that descriptions based on samples of live individuals are valid. I also discuss whether recent descriptions of such a nature involve a different degree of scientific rigour to other descriptions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas M. Donegan (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: