DIVISION II. RULES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER IV. EFFECTIVE AND VALID PUBLICATION
SECTION 3. AUTHOR CITATIONS
46.1. In publications,
particularly those dealing with taxonomy and nomenclature, it may be
desirable, even when no bibliographic reference to the protologue is
made, to cite the author(s) of the name concerned (see
Art. 6 Note 2; see also Art. 22.1 and
26.1). In so doing, the following rules are to be followed.
Ex. 1. Rosaceae Juss., Rosa L., Rosa gallica L.,
Rosa gallica var. eriostyla R. Keller, Rosa gallica L. var. gallica.
46.2. A name of a new taxon must
be attributed to the author or authors to whom both the name and the
validating description or diagnosis were ascribed, even when authorship
of the publication is different. A new combination or a nomen novum
must be attributed to the author or authors to whom it was ascribed
when, in the publication in which it appears, it is explicitly stated
that they contributed in some way to that publication. Art. 46.4
notwithstanding, authorship of a new name or combination must always be
accepted as ascribed, even when it differs from authorship of the
publication, when at least one author is common to both.
The name Viburnum ternatum
was published in Sargent (Trees & Shrubs 2: 37. 1907). It was
ascribed to "Rehd.", and the whole account of the species was signed
"Alfred Rehder" at the end of the article. The name is therefore cited
In a paper by Hilliard & Burtt (1986) names of new species of
including S. altum,
were ascribed to
Kukkonen, preceded by a statement "The following diagnostic
descriptions of new species have been supplied by Dr. I. Kukkonen in
order to make the names available for use". The name is therefore cited
In Torrey & Gray (1838) the names
and C. monandrum
were ascribed to "Nutt.
mss.", and the descriptions were enclosed in double quotes indicating
that Nuttall wrote them, as acknowledged in the preface. The names are
therefore cited as
Nutt. and C. monandrum
The name Brachystelma
was published by Sims (1822) along with one new species listed as "Brachystelma tuberosa
Brown Mscr."; in addition, at the end of the generic description, Sims added "Brown, Mscr.",
indicating that Brown wrote it. Because the generic and specific names were validly published simultaneously (Art. 42
), the direct
association of Brown's name with the specific name and the generic description establishes the correct citation of the generic name as
When publishing Eucryphiaceae
(1848) the otherwise unnamed author "W.", in a review of Gay's Flora chilena
wrote "wird die Gattung Eucryphia
als Typus einer neuen Familie, der Eucryphiaceae
thus ascribing both the name and its validating description to Gay (Fl. Chil. 1: 348. 1846), who
used the name "Eucrifiaceas", which was not validly published under Art. 18.4
The name is therefore cited as Eucryphiaceae
Green (1985) ascribed the new combination
to Paul G. Wilson and elsewhere in the same publication acknowledged his assistance. The name is therefore cited as
(F. Muell.) Paul G. Wilson.
The authorship of Steyerbromelia discolor
L. B. Sm. & H. Rob. (1984) is accepted as originally ascribed,
although the new species was described in a paper authored by Smith
alone. The same applies to the new combination
(L.) Brummitt (in Kirkia 5: 265. 1966), thus ascribed, published in a paper authored jointly by Brummitt & Gillett.
The appropriate author citation for Baloghia pininsularis
Art. 37 Ex. 3
is Guillaumin, and not McPherson & Tirel, because both the name and
validating description were ascribed to Guillaumin in the protologue.
When authorship of a name
differs from authorship of the publication in which it was validly
published, both are sometimes cited, connected by the word "in". In
such a case, "in" and what follows are part of a bibliographic citation
and are better omitted unless the place of publication is being cited.
The original description of the new species
Wahlenb. (in Acharius, Methodus, Suppl.:
17. 1803) is ascribed by Acharius to "Wahlenb. Msc.", and the name
itself is ascribed to "Wahlenb." (not in the text of the Supplement but
in the index to the Methodus, p. 392). The name is therefore
appropriately cited as
Wahlenb., better not as V. aethiobola
"Wahlenb. in Acharius" (unless followed by a bibliographic citation of the place of publication), and certainly not as
"Wahlenb. ex Ach."
The name Drymaria arenarioides
in Roemer & Schultes (Syst. Veg. 5: 406. 1819), with the name ascribed to "Humb. et Bonpl." and
the description ascribed to "Reliqu. Willd. MS." Because of this ascription, and because vol. 5
of this work is authored by Schultes alone, the name is to be cited as D. arenarioides
Humb. & Bonpl. ex Schult., not as D. arenarioides
Willd. or D. arenarioides
ex Roem. & Schult. or D. arenarioides
Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd.
When publishing Strasburgeriaceae
Solereder wrote of Strasburgeria
Baill. "welche neuerdings von Van Tieghem als Typus
einer eigenen Familie (Strasburgeriaceae)
angesehen wird" thus ascribing both the family
name and its validating description to Tieghem (in J. Bot. (Morot) 17: 204. 1903), who used the
name "Strasburgériacées", which was not validly published under Art. 18.4
The name is therefore cited as Strasburgeriaceae
Tiegh., or Strasburgeriaceae
in Solereder when followed by a bibliographic citation, but not Strasburgeriaceae
When publishing Elaeocarpaceae
Candolle wrote "Elaeocarpeae
. Juss., Ann. Mus. 11, p. 233" thus ascribing both the name
and its validating diagnosis to Jussieu (in Ann. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. 11: 233. 1808), who
provided a diagnosis separating an unnamed family comprising Elaeocarpus
L. from Tiliaceae
The family name is therefore cited as Elaeocarpaceae
Juss., or Elaeocarpaceae
in Candolle when followed by a bibliographic citation, but not Elaeocarpaceae
Juss. ex DC.
46.3. For the purposes of this
Article, ascription is the direct association of the name of a person
or persons with a new name or description or diagnosis of a taxon. An
author citation appearing in a list of synonyms does not constitute
ascription, nor does reference to a basionym or a replaced synonym (regardless of
bibliographic accuracy) or reference to a homonym, or a formal error.
The name Asperococcus pusillus
in Hooker (Brit. Fl., ed. 4, 2(1): 277. 1833), with the name and diagnosis ascribed simultaneously
in a paragraph ending with "Carm. MSS." followed by a description ascribed similarly to
Carmichael. Direct association of Carmichael with both the name and the diagnosis is thus
inferred and the name must be cited as A. pusillus
Carmich. However, the paragraph containing
the name A. castaneus
and its diagnosis, published by Hooker on the same page of the
same work, ends with "Scytosiphon castaneus, Carm. MSS."
Because Carmichael is directly
associated with "S. castaneus"
and not A. castaneus
, the name of this species is
correctly cited as A. castaneus
Hook. even though the following description is ascribed to Carmichael.
Ex. 15. Lichen debilis
Sm. (1812) was not ascribed to Turner and Borrer by Smith's citing "Calicium debile
Turn. and Borr. Mss." as a synonym.
Ex. 16. Malpighia emarginata
DC. (1824) was not
ascribed to Moçino & Sessé by Candolle's writing "M. emarginata
(fl. mex. ic. ined.)".
However, Sicyos triqueter
Moç. & Sessé ex Ser. (1830) was ascribed to these authors by
Seringe's writing "S. triqueter
(Moç. & Sessé, fl. mex. mss.)".
When Opiz (1852) wrote "Hemisphace
Bentham" he did not ascribe the generic name to Bentham but provided an indirect reference to the basionym,
Benth. (see Art. 32 Ex.
When Brotherus (1907) published "Dichelodontium nitidulum
Hooker & Wilson" he provided an indirect reference to the basionym,
Hook. f. & Wilson, and did not ascribe
the new combination to Hooker and Wilson. He did, however, ascribe to
them the simultaneously published name of his new genus,
When She & Watson (in Wu & al., Fl. China 14: 72.
2005) wrote "Bupleurum hamiltonii
C. Y. Wu ex R. H. Shan & Yin
Li, Acta Phytotax. Sin. 12: 291. 1974" they did not ascribe the new combination to any of those authors
but provided a full and direct reference to the basionym, B. tenue
C. Y. Wu ex R. H. Shan & Yin Li.
When Sirodot (1872) wrote "Lemanea
Bory" he in fact published a later homonym (see
Art. 48 Ex. 1
). His reference to Bory's earlier homonym is not therefore ascription of the later homonym,
Sirodot, to Bory.
When Piper (in Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 28: 42. 1915)
wrote "Andropogon sorghum drummondii
(Nees) Hackel" for one of eleven "wild subspecies" of
(L.) Brot., this was not an ascription to Hackel, but is treated as a formal
error, since Hackel (in Candolle & Candolle, Monogr. Phan. 6: 507. 1889) had actually published
this as A. sorghum
(Nees) Hack. Furthermore, because the basionym
was published by Steudel (1854) as "A. drummondii
Nees (mpt. sub Sorghum
)" this reference
to the unpublished name "Sorghum drummondii
Nees" is also not ascription (see Note 2),
therefore the correct author citation for Hackel's taxon is A. sorghum
(Steud.) Hack. and for Piper's taxon A. sorghum
When the epithet of a validly published name is
taken up from and attributed to the author of a different binary designation that has not been
validly published, only the author of the validly published name is to be cited.
" was published, but not
validly so, by Forsskål (Fl. Aegypt.-Arab.: cvii, 63. 1775). The epithet was taken up by Vahl
(Symb. Bot. 1: 21. 1790), who validly published the name Celastrus edulis
citing "Catha edulis
in synonymy. The name Celastrus edulis
must be attributed to Vahl alone, not to "Forssk. ex Vahl". The name
was first validly published by Endlicher (Enchir. Bot.: 575. 1841), whose combination is to be cited
as Catha edulis
46.4. A name of a new taxon must
be attributed to the author or authors of the publication in which it
appears when only the name but not the validating description or
diagnosis was ascribed to a different author or to different authors. A
new combination or a nomen novum must be attributed to the author or
authors of the publication in which it appears, although it was
ascribed to a different author or to different authors, when no
separate statement was made that they contributed in some way to that
publication. However, in both cases authorship as ascribed, followed by
"ex", may be inserted before the name(s) of the publishing author(s).
Seemann (1865) published Gossypium tomentosum
"Nutt. mss.", followed by a validating description not ascribed to Nuttall; the name may be cited as
Nutt. ex Seem. or G. tomentosum
Rudolphi published Pinaceae
(1830) as “Pineae
followed by a validating diagnosis not ascribed to Sprengel; the name may be cited as Pinaceae
Spreng. ex F.
Rudolphi or Pinaceae
The name Lithocarpus polystachyus
published by Rehder (1919) was based on
A. DC. (1864), ascribed by Candolle to "Wall.! list n. 2789" but formerly a nomen nudum; Rehder's combination may be cited as
(Wall. ex A. DC.) Rehder or L. polystachyus
(A. DC.) Rehder.
Ex. 26. Lilium tianschanicum
was described by Grubov (1977) as a new species and its name was
ascribed to Ivanova; since there is no indication that Ivanova provided
the validating description, the name may be cited as
N. A. Ivanova ex Grubov or L. tianschanicum
In a paper by Boufford, Tsi and Wang (1990) the name
was ascribed to Lu with no indication
that Lu provided the description; the name should be attributed to
Boufford & al. or to L. T. Lu ex Boufford & al.
Green (1985) ascribed the new combination
to "(Fenzl) A. S. George"; since Green
nowhere mentioned that George had contributed in any way, the combining
author must be cited as A. S. George ex J. W. Green or just J. W. Green.
However, R. Brown is accepted as the author of the treatments of genera and species appearing under his name in Aiton's
ed. 2 (1810-1813), even when new names or the
descriptions validating them are not explicitly ascribed to him. In a
postscript to that work (5: 532. 1813), Aiton wrote: "Much new
matter has been added by [Robert Brown] ... the greater part of his
able improvements are distinguished by the signature
." The latter phrase is therefore a statement of authorship not merely an ascription. For example, the combination
based by indirect reference on Epidendrum triquetrum
Sw. (1788), is to be cited as
(Sw.) R. Br. (1813) and not attributed to "R. Br.
ex Aiton", or to Aiton alone, because in the generic heading Brown is
credited with authorship of the treatment of
For the purposes of this Article, the authorship of a publication is the
authorship of that part of a publication in which a name appears regardless of the authorship or editorship of the publication as a whole.
Ex. 30. Pittosporum buxifolium
was described as a new species, with its name
ascribed to Feng, in Wu & Li, Flora yunnanica
, vol. 3 (1983). The account of Pittosporaceae
in that flora was
authored by Yin, while the whole volume was edited by Wu & Li. The author of the publication (including the validating
diagnosis) was Yin. The name may therefore be cited as either P. buxifolium
K. M. Feng ex W. Q. Yin or just P.
W. Q. Yin, but not P. buxifolium
K. M. Feng ex C. Y. Wu & H. W. Li, nor P. buxifolium
C. Y. Wu
& H. W. Li.
was described as a new form, with
its name ascribed to Jiang & Fu in Ma & al., Flora intramongolica
, ed. 2, vol. 3 (1989). The account of Vicia
in that flora was authored by Jiang, while the whole volume was jointly edited by Ma & al. The author of the publication
is Jiang, who is common to the authorship ascribed to the name, which must therefore be cited as V. amurensis
Y. C. Jiang & S. M. Fu and not V. amurensis
Y. C. Jiang & S. M. Fu ex Ma
Ex. 32. Centaurea funkii
“Lge. ined.” was described in
Prodromus florae hispanicae
(2: 154. 1865). On the title page of each volume Willkomm & Lange are given as
authors (“auctoribus ...”). However, the different family treatments are by one or the other and Fam. 63 Compositae
has a footnote “Auctore Willkomm”. The full citation is therefore C. funkii
Lange ex Willk. [in Willkomm & Lange, …].
46.6. The citation of an author
who published the name before the starting-point of the group concerned
may be indicated by the use of the word "ex". For groups with a
starting-point later than 1753, when a pre-starting-point name was
changed in rank or taxonomic position by the first author who validly
published it, the name of the pre-starting-point author may be added in
parentheses, followed by "ex".
Linnaeus (1754) ascribed the name Lupinus
to the pre-starting-point author Tournefort; the name may be cited as
Tourn. ex L. (1753) or Lupinus
L. (see Art.
Ex. 34. Lyngbya glutinosa
C. Agardh (Syst. Alg.: 73. 1824) was taken up by Gomont in the publication which marks the starting-point of the
(in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot., ser. 7, 15: 339. 1892) as
. This may be cited as H. glutinosum
(C. Agardh) ex Gomont.
46.7. In determining the correct author citation, only internal evidence in the publication (as defined in
where the name was validly published is to be accepted, including
ascription of the name, statements in the introduction, title, or
acknowledgements, and typographical or stylistic distinctions in the
Although the descriptions in Aiton's
(1789) are generally considered to have been
written by Solander or Dryander, the names of new taxa published there
must be attributed to Aiton, the stated author of the work, except
where a name and description were both ascribed in that work to
The name Andreaea angustata
was published in a work of Limpricht (1885) with the ascription "nov.
sp. Lindb. in litt. ad Breidler 1884", but there is no internal
evidence that Lindberg had supplied the validating description.
Authorship is therefore to be cited as "Limpr." or "Lindb. ex Limpr."
External evidence may be
used to determine authorship of new names and combinations included in
a publication or article for which there is no internal evidence of
No authorship appears
anywhere in the work known as "Cat. Pl. Upper Louisiana. 1813", a
catalogue of plants available from the Fraser Brothers Nursery. Based
on external evidence (cf. Stafleu & Cowan in Regnum Veg. 105: 785.
1981), authorship of the document, and of new names such as
that are published in it, are attributed to Thomas Nuttall.
The book that appeared under the title
Vollständiges systematisches Verzeichniß aller Gewächse Teutschlandes
... (Leipzig 1782) bears no explicit authorship but is attributed to
"einem Mitgliede der Gesellschaft Naturforschender Freunde". External
evidence may be used to determine that G. A. Honckeny is the author of
the work and of new names that appear in it (e.g.
Honck., Phleum hirsutum
Honck.; but see Art. 23 Ex.
), as done by Pritzel (Thes. Lit. Bot.: 123. 1847).
Authors publishing new
names and wishing to establish that other persons' names followed by
"ex" may precede theirs in authorship citation may adopt the "ex"
citation in the protologue.
In validating the name Nothotsuga,
Page (1989) cited it as "Nothotsuga
H.-H. Hu ex C. N. Page", noting that in 1951 Hu had published it as a
nomen nudum; the name may be attributed to Hu ex C. N. Page or just C.
Atwood (1981) ascribed the name of a new species,
to "Heller ex Atwood", with a note
stating that it was originally named by Heller, then deceased; the name
may be attributed to A. H. Heller ex J. T. Atwood or just J. T. Atwood.
46A.1. For the purpose of author citation, prefixes indicating ennoblement (see
Rec. 60C.5(d-e)) should be suppressed unless they are an inseparable part of the name.
Ex. 1. Lam. for J. B. P. A. Monet Chevalier de Lamarck, but De Wild. for E. De Wildeman.
46A.2. When a name in an author
citation is abbreviated, the abbreviation should be long enough to be
distinctive, and should normally end with a consonant that, in the full
name, precedes a vowel. The first letters should be given without any
omission, but one of the last characteristic consonants of the name may
be added when this is customary.
Ex. 2. L. for Linnaeus; Fr. for
Fries; Juss. for Jussieu; Rich. for Richard; Bertol. for Bertoloni, to
distinguish it from Bertero; Michx. for Michaux, to distinguish it from
46A.3. Given names or accessory
designations serving to distinguish two botanists of the same name
should be abridged in the same way.
Ex. 3. R. Br. for Robert Brown; A.
Juss. for Adrien de Jussieu; Burm. f. for Burman filius; J. F. Gmel.
for Johann Friedrich Gmelin, J. G. Gmel. for Johann Georg Gmelin, C. C.
Gmel. for Carl Christian Gmelin, S. G. Gmel. for Samuel Gottlieb
Gmelin; Müll. Arg. for Jean Müller argoviensis (of Aargau).
46A.4. When it is a well-established custom to abridge a name in another manner, it is advisable to conform to custom.
Ex. 4. DC. for Augustin-Pyramus de Candolle; St.-Hil. for Saint-Hilaire.
Brummitt & Powell's Authors of plant names
(1992) provides unambiguous standard abbreviations, in conformity with
the present Recommendation, for a large number of authors of plant
names, and these abbreviations, updated as necessary from the International Plant Names Index
), have been used for author citations
throughout the present
46B.1. In citing the author of the
scientific name of a taxon, the romanization of the author's name given
in the original publication should normally be accepted. Where an
author failed to give a romanization, or where an author has at
different times used different romanizations, then the romanization
known to be preferred by the author or that most frequently adopted by
the author should be accepted. In the absence of such information the
author's name should be romanized in accordance with an internationally
46B.2. Authors of scientific names
whose personal names are not written in Roman letters should romanize
their names, preferably (but not necessarily) in accordance with an
internationally available standard and, as a matter of typographical
convenience, without diacritical signs. Once authors have selected the
romanization of their personal names, they should use it consistently
thereafter. Whenever possible, authors should not permit editors or
publishers to change the romanization of their personal names.
46C.1. After a name published
jointly by two authors, both authors should be cited, linked by the
word "et" or by an ampersand (&).
Ex. 1. Didymopanax gleasonii Britton et Wilson (or Britton & Wilson).
46C.2. After a name published
jointly by more than two authors, the citation should be restricted to
the first author followed by "et al." or "& al.", except in the
Ex. 2. Lapeirousia erythrantha var.
welwitschii (Baker) Geerinck, Lisowski, Malaisse & Symoens (in Bull. Soc. Roy. Bot. Belgique 105: 336. 1972) should be cited as
L. erythrantha var. welwitschii (Baker) Geerinck & al.
46D.1. Authors should cite
themselves by name after each new name they publish rather than refer
to themselves by expressions such as "nobis" (nob.) or "mihi" (m.).
2006, by International Association for Plant Taxonomy. This page last updated