@nigredo just make sure you call it as your own child, and is aware of the scientific name it has in another (more technologically advanced) universe so you can identify it from a piece of paper about it with said name and pictures drawn using a stronger magnification than you have ever used to observe it.
I wanna address this more in depth for anyone who is actually interested since no one else seems to have brought it up (its an issue with tl, the official english has no issue)
As written here there is no way she would understand anything he says. Taxonomy is inherently arbitrary in terms of naming, its just a set of rules and conventions many have agrees upon so we can accurately reference things. there is nothing inherently scientific about the name
Tyrannosaurus rex
from wikipedia:
The generic name is derived from the Greek words τύραννος (tyrannos, meaning "tyrant") and σαῦρος (sauros, meaning "lizard"). Osborn used the Latin word rex, meaning "king", for the specific name. The full binomial therefore translates to "tyrant lizard the king" or "King Tyrant Lizard", emphasizing the animal's size and presumed dominance over other species of the time.[6]
of course people often do name things based on what they look like, in this case "big and scary"
while others are named after famous people the taxonomist like eg
A new insect species, Sciophilia holopaineni, discovered by a Finnish biologist named Jukka Salmela of Metsähallitus Parks & Wildlife, has been named after Tuomas Holopainen, because of Holopainen's love for nature.
(Tuomas Holopainen is a keyboard player and songwriter/composer for the metal band Nightwish)
It could just as well have been named John Scarylizard, what matters is the system. many species have also been described independently by many different authors and has several recognized names but with only one official. the official name is generally decided by consensus, typically the first person to describe a species gets to pick the name, but sometimes exceptions happen, like if the first guy to describe it did a really bad job and the next guy did a really good job. all that really matters is it having a name to refer unambiguously to that species.
however all these names and framework would probably be completely different in another world, if they even had the concept of taxonomy at all.
in the english release he says:
ACTINOBACTERIA ARE MOLD-LIKE MICROORGANISMS THAT EXTEND THEIR HYPHAE RADIALLY AS THEY GROW.
OF THEM, I'D LIKE TO FIND THE STREPTOMYCES, THE VARIETIES THAT HAVE QUALITIES AS DEPICTED IN THIS DIAGRAM.
which is exactly what taxonomy is about: describing things in great detail with many drawings pictures and diagrams, then presenting the name you will be using to refer to them
this is a obviously minor detail since we live in his old world so we understand what he is referring to.
in regards to magnification microscopes have been distributed so that shouldnt be a problem. and as others have mentioned its very common for things to be studied for a long time before suddenly having a new use discovered