(071) Proposal for accountability in designating types based on virtually seen original material

Online databases have provided considerable advantages to many fields of investigation, including plant taxonomy. Despite the positive impacts digital resources for taxonomists, especially in providing ease access information regarding literature and (potential) type specimens, there can be surprising negative consequences. In recent years has been a very significant increase number papers that include typifications based on inspection images original material rather than actual specimens. There is common curatorial issue associated with undertaking typifications, those web-sourced, images. This problem not caused by web per se, but it certainly exacerbated it. our experience, authors infrequently notify herbaria one or more their specimens selected nominated as particular type, lectotype being example. Authors send publications (and/or appropriately annotated determinavit/confirmavit slips) affected herbaria. Therefore, these institutions are often unaware changes occurred affect holdings, appropriate specimen curation done. A possible (but seemingly common) consequence this could lead an inadvertent retypification typified name. We aware examples from range journals where herbarium status following publication article. It relevant remember here purpose typification (hopefully) bring precision stability names involved. view, goals would best served if newly designated types were integral part process. view above, we feel new Recommendation Code (Turland & al. Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) warranted. “9C.2. case choice holotype, lectotype, neotype, epitype author(s) designating should curator herbarium, collection, institution update labelling thereby reduce chances further nomenclatural amendments retypification.” thank Dr. Bruce Maslin (PERTH) Nicholas Turland (B) insightful comments suggestions. also grateful Mr. Vijay Crishna, Director NGCPR, his consistent research support.