Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Retrospective observational study on the use of acetyl-L-carnitine in ALS

: ALCAR (Acetyl-L-carnitine) is a donor of acetyl groups and increases the intracellular levels of carnitine, the primary transporter of fatty acids across the mitochondrial membranes. In vivo studies showed that ALCAR decrease oxidative stress markers and pro-inflammatory cytokines. In a previous double-blind placebo-controlled phase II trial showed positive effects on self-sufficiency (defined as a score of 3+ on the ALSFRS-R items for swallowing, cutting food and handling utensils, and walking) ALSFRS-R total score and FVC. We conducted an observational, retrospective, multicentre, case-control study to provide additional data on the effects of ALCAR in subjects with ALS in Italy. Subjects treated with ALCAR 1.5 g/day or 3 g/day were included and matched with not treated subjects by sex, age at diagnosis, site of onset, and time from diagnosis to baseline, (45 subjects per group). ALCAR 3 g/day vs not treated: 22 not treated subjects (48.9%) were still alive at 24 months after baseline, compared to 23 (51.1%) treated subjects (adj. OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.46-3.02). No statistically significant differences were detected in ALSFRS nor FVC nor self-sufficiency. ALCAR 1.5 g/day vs not treated: 22 not treated subjects (48.9%) were still alive at 24 months after baseline, compared to 32 (71.1%) treated subjects (adj. OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10-0.71). For ALSFRS-R, a mean slope of - 1.0 was observed in treated subjects compared to - 1.4 in those not treated (p = 0.0575). No statistically significant difference was detected in the FVC nor self-sufficiency. Additional evidence should be provided to confirm the efficacy of the drug and provide a rationale for the dosage