Notes: For observations supported by molecular data. Species list title envisions a fifth checkbox in the name proposal page beneath, ‘Recognized by sight,’ ‘Used References,’ ‘Based on microscopic features,’ and ‘Based on chemical features.’
i made this species list because I have used (and expect others have used) the ‘☑ Based on chemical features’ box to mean macro- and/or micro-morphological chemical reactions (or the lack thereof). when I’ve IDed something by its KOH spot test results, or the presence of an amyloid apical apparatus, I check ‘☑ Based on chemical features’ accordingly. this list makes a necessary distinction between those kinds of chemical features and molecular/DNA-based ones.
you could argue that the new sequence entry feature accomplishes this task without the need for a species list like this one, but not every observation with genetic data has had it entered in that form. on the contrary, as we’ve seen, many observations have that info in plain text in the comments or notes, and quite possibly more than those using the new sequence feature.
to make the list resemble the radio boxes on name proposals. what is a chemical checkbox?
Do we need a separate checkbox or can we make do with the chemical checkbox plus a note with the name proposal?