Author:
Fedosov Alexander,Puillandre Nicolas,Fischell Frank,Patmanidis Stefanos,Miralles Aurélien,Vences Miguel
Reference19 articles.
1. Renner SS (2016) A return to Linnaeus’s focus on diagnosis, not description: the use of DNA characters in the formal naming of species. Syst Biol 65:1085–1095. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw032
2. ICZN (ed) (1999) International code of zoological nomenclature, 4th edn. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London. http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp. Accessed 10 Jan 2023
3. Turland NJ, Wiersema JH, Barrie FR, Greuter W, Hawksworth DL, Herendeen PS, Knapp S, Kusber W-H, Li D-Z, Marhold K, May TW, Mc Neill J, Monro AM, Prado J, Price MJ, Smith GF (eds) (2018) International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Shenzhen, China, July 2017. Regnum Vegetabile 159. Koeltz Botanical Books, Glashütten. https://doi.org/10.12705/Code.2018
4. Bickford D, Lohman DJ, Sodhi NS, Ng PK, Meier R, Winker K, Ingram KK, Das I (2007) Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 22:148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.004
5. Fišer C, Robinson CT, Malard F (2018) Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept. Mol Ecol 27:613–635. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14486