contents  |  subject index  | index to scientific names  |  glossary  |  contact  |  regnum vegetabile 
frameset version


Article 46

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.

Ex. 2. 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 as V. ternatum Rehder.
Ex. 3. In a paper by Hilliard & Burtt (1986) names of new species of Schoenoxiphium, 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 as S. altum Kukkonen.
Ex. 4. In Torrey & Gray (1838) the names Calyptridium 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 Calyptridium Nutt. and C. monandrum Nutt.
Ex. 5. 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 Brachystelma R. Br.
Ex. 6. When publishing Eucryphiaceae (1848) the otherwise unnamed author "W.", in a review of Gay's Flora chilena (1845-1854), 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 Gay.
Ex. 7. Green (1985) ascribed the new combination Neotysonia phyllostegia to Paul G. Wilson and elsewhere in the same publication acknowledged his assistance. The name is therefore cited as N. phyllostegia (F. Muell.) Paul G. Wilson.
Ex. 8. 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 Sophora tomentosa subsp. occidentalis (L.) Brummitt (in Kirkia 5: 265. 1966), thus ascribed, published in a paper authored jointly by Brummitt & Gillett.
Ex. 9. The appropriate author citation for Baloghia pininsularis (see Art. 37 Ex. 3) is Guillaumin, and not McPherson & Tirel, because both the name and validating description were ascribed to Guillaumin in the protologue.
Note 1. 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.
Ex. 10. The original description of the new species Verrucaria aethiobola 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 V. aethiobola Wahlenb., better not as V. aethiobola "Wahlenb. in Acharius" (unless followed by a bibliographic citation of the place of publication), and certainly not as V. aethiobola "Wahlenb. ex Ach."
Ex. 11. The name Drymaria arenarioides was published 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 Willd. ex Roem. & Schult. or D. arenarioides Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd.
Ex. 12. When publishing Strasburgeriaceae (1908) 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 Tiegh. in Solereder when followed by a bibliographic citation, but not Strasburgeriaceae Tiegh. ex Soler.
Ex. 13. When publishing Elaeocarpaceae (1816) 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 Juss. 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.

Ex. 14. The name Asperococcus pusillus was published 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.)".
Ex. 17. When Opiz (1852) wrote "Hemisphace Bentham" he did not ascribe the generic name to Bentham but provided an indirect reference to the basionym, Salvia sect. Hemisphace Benth. (see Art. 32 Ex. 8).
Ex. 18. When Brotherus (1907) published "Dichelodontium nitidulum Hooker & Wilson" he provided an indirect reference to the basionym, Leucodon nitidulus 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, Dichelodontium.
Ex. 19. When She & Watson (in Wu & al., Fl. China 14: 72. 2005) wrote "Bupleurum hamiltonii var. paucefulcrans 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 var. paucefulcrans C. Y. Wu ex R. H. Shan & Yin Li.
Ex. 20. 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, Lemanea Sirodot, to Bory.
Ex. 21. When Piper (in Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 28: 42. 1915) wrote "Andropogon sorghum drummondii (Nees) Hackel" for one of eleven "wild subspecies" of A. sorghum (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 var. drummondii (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 var. drummondii (Steud.) Hack. and for Piper's taxon A. sorghum subsp. drummondii (Steud.) Piper.
Note 2. 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.
Ex. 22. "Catha edulis" 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 Forssk." in synonymy. The name Celastrus edulis must be attributed to Vahl alone, not to "Forssk. ex Vahl". The name Catha edulis was first validly published by Endlicher (Enchir. Bot.: 575. 1841), whose combination is to be cited as Catha edulis (Vahl) Endl.

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).

Ex. 23. Seemann (1865) published Gossypium tomentosum "Nutt. mss.", followed by a validating description not ascribed to Nuttall; the name may be cited as G. tomentosum Nutt. ex Seem. or G. tomentosum Seem.
Ex. 24. Rudolphi published Pinaceae (1830) as “Pineae. Spreng.”, followed by a validating diagnosis not ascribed to Sprengel; the name may be cited as Pinaceae Spreng. ex F. Rudolphi or Pinaceae F. Rudolphi.
Ex. 25. The name Lithocarpus polystachyus published by Rehder (1919) was based on Quercus polystachya A. DC. (1864), ascribed by Candolle to "Wall.! list n. 2789" but formerly a nomen nudum; Rehder's combination may be cited as L. polystachyus (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 L. tianschanicum N. A. Ivanova ex Grubov or L. tianschanicum Grubov.
Ex. 27. In a paper by Boufford, Tsi and Wang (1990) the name Rubus fanjingshanensis 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.
Ex. 28. Green (1985) ascribed the new combination Tersonia cyathiflora 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.
Ex. 29. However, R. Brown is accepted as the author of the treatments of genera and species appearing under his name in Aiton's Hortus kewensis, 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 Brown mss." The latter phrase is therefore a statement of authorship not merely an ascription. For example, the combination Oncidium triquetrum, based by indirect reference on Epidendrum triquetrum Sw. (1788), is to be cited as O. triquetrum (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 Oncidium.

46.5. 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. buxifolium 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.
Ex. 31. Vicia amurensis f. sanneensis 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 f. sanneensis Y. C. Jiang & S. M. Fu and not V. amurensis f. sanneensis Y. C. Jiang & S. M. Fu ex Ma & al.
Ex. 32. Centaurea funkii var. xeranthemoides “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 var. xeranthemoides 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".

Ex. 33. Linnaeus (1754) ascribed the name Lupinus to the pre-starting-point author Tournefort; the name may be cited as Lupinus Tourn. ex L. (1753) or Lupinus L. (see Art. 13.4).
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 "Nostocaceae homocysteae" (in Ann. Sci. Nat., Bot., ser. 7, 15: 339. 1892) as Hydrocoleum glutinosum. 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 Art. 35.5) 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 text.

Ex. 35. Although the descriptions in Aiton's Hortus kewensis (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 somebody else.
Ex. 36. 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."
Note 3. 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 authorship.
Ex. 37. 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 Oenothera macrocarpa that are published in it, are attributed to Thomas Nuttall.
Ex. 38. 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. Poa vallesiana Honck., Phleum hirsutum Honck.; but see Art. 23 Ex. 14), as done by Pritzel (Thes. Lit. Bot.: 123. 1847).
Note 4. 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.
Ex. 39. 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. N. Page.
Ex. 40. Atwood (1981) ascribed the name of a new species, Maxillaria mombachoënsis, 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.

Recommendation 46A

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 Micheli.

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.
Note 1. 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 ( and Index Fungorum (, have been used for author citations throughout the present Code.

Recommendation 46B

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 available standard.

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.

Recommendation 46C

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 original publication.

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.

Recommendation 46D

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.).


(c) 2006, by International Association for Plant Taxonomy. This page last updated  15.03.2007 .