Support the Best of Both Worlds

This is the best repository for prokaryotic past and future. I may disagree with some name changes, but this is basically the only site that is transparent, concise, and direct with the knowledge/sequences requiired. Do you know how hard it is to simply get a 16S sequence with one click?! Or see recent changes to taxonomy and more?! It's right there, unlike everyone else! I support this site wholeheartedly.

This may mean a reduction in standard and result to errors.

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal.

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal.

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal.

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal.

I support the petition against accepting the SeqCode, as is. The SeqCode not only removes the incentive to cultivate and deposit strains, but also will allow the the continuation of deposited genomic data of wrongly speciate microorganisms, adding to the already poorly curated Genbank entries.

Great need to standardize names

It is completely idiotic that a single nucleotide sequence be enough to alter any taxonomic registry, and in this, I completely agree with the ICSP. However, advances in broght about by genomics, in particular metagenomics cannot be understated and should be addressed. As clearly stated in the petition, I believe the the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal is the best compromise we can achieve to restore the nomenclature. Thus, I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal

The deposit in two culture collections is OK. But it has not been accepted some countries´s legislation. In Brazil, for example, a TTM has to be signed, stating that it can be freely used for taxonomic, phylogenetic and research studies, but not for commercial development, in which case another agreement has to be signed. I believe that this is fair. Other rich countries in biodivesity are in the same situation, as India and South Africa. Therefore, Brazil, India, South Africa and others cannot describe new species, what is crazy. Therefore, our research group agrees with "best os both worlds" but requiring that the legislation of each country should be considered and respected

I support the petition against accepting the SeqCode, as is. The SeqCode removes the incentive to cultivate and deposit strains, reduces scientific replicability, and unfairly equates names based on organisms with those based solely on sequences. I urge the ICSP to adopt the "Best of Both Worlds" proposal by Arahal et al. 2024. This approach maintains current publication standards, properly regulates Candidatus names, and acknowledges contributions from both culture-based and sequence-based research. Adopting this proposal will preserve scientific integrity and collaboration in prokaryotic nomenclature.

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal

I support the Best of both worlds proposal.

I found the species of Trueperella abortisuis．

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal

We're entering a brave new world of genomics and need to acknowledge that while not completely removing the guard rails. I support "the best of both worlds" solution

As a clinical microbiologist I strongly support the "Best of Both Worlds" proposal. It is actually a matter of patient safety.

I could not agree more!

I support the ''Best of Both Worlds'' proposal

I support the proposal by Arahal et al. to regulate Candidatus names in the same way as the names of taxa to be validly described according to the ICNP rules. However, if the ICSP adopts this proposal, this will not result in the end of the SeqCode initiative. There will still be two competing taxonomies for prokaryotes. The colleagues who invented the SeqCode, were right, we need the opportunity to validly describe uncultured prokaryotes. Without this opportunity microbiologists will never have the chance to establish a (single) taxonomy covering the entire prokaryotic diversity. This problem was ignored by the ICSP during the past 30 years. This proposal is at least a partial solution, but this solution comes too late. The SeqCode was established and is in use. To defame the SeqCode as an "unfair idea" is simply unfair.