There’s something fishy in this story of American discovery.

Hoping to gain a deeper understanding of a different Steinernema species, Dillman’s laboratory requested samples from colleagues in Thailand. “We did DNA analysis on the samples and realized they weren’t the ones we had requested. Genetically, they didn’t look like anything else that has ever been described,” Dillman said.

Dillman and his colleagues have now described the new species in the Journal of Parasitology.

What happened to the Thai colleagues who acquired and sent the samples? Was that not the actual discovery phase? There’s a huge hole in this story

They’ve named the new species Steinernema adamsi after the American biologist Byron Adams, Biology Department chair at Brigham Young University. […] Dillman said. “He was also my undergraduate advisor and the person who introduced me to nematodes. This seemed a fitting tribute to him.”

It reads to me like a pregnant woman who goes to the hospital for a checkup and is told by her doctor that he will name her baby Dillman to give credit to the lab he used for tests.

Does the person who requests data from a colleague and simply reads it suddenly get to claim ownership over that data?