Abstract Name-bearing type specimens have a fundamental role in characterizing biodiversity, as these objects represent the physical link between a scientific name and the biological organism. Type specimens are usually deposited in natural history collections, which provide key infrastructure for research on essential biological structures and processes, while preserving records of biodiversity for future generations. Modern systematics increasingly depends on genetic and genomic data to differentiate and characterize species. While the results of genome sequencing are often connected to a physical voucher specimen, they are rarely derived from the ultimate taxonomic reference for a species, that is, the name-bearing type specimens. This is a known but underappreciated problem for ensuring the replicability of findings, especially those that affect the interpretation of biodiversity distributions and phylogenetic relationships. Destructive sampling of museum specimens, particularly of type material, often carries a high risk of sequencing failure, and thus the cost of damage to the specimen may outweigh the resulting benefit. Both taxonomic work and genome sequencing require specialist skills, and there are often communication gaps between the respective experts. A new, harmonized approach, maximizing information extraction while minimizing risk to type specimens, is a critical step forward toward linking disciplines across biodiversity research and promoting a better taxonomic and systematic understanding of eukaryotic diversity. The genetic makeup of a type specimen is a fundamental part of its biological information, which can and should be made freely and digitally available through type genomics. Here, we describe guidelines for the use of nomenclatural types in genome sequencing approaches, considering different kinds of types in different stages of preservation and different data types.