Article 50. Authors of names and nomenclatural acts.
50.1. Identity of authors. The author of a name or nomenclatural act is the person who first publishes it [Arts. 8, 11] in a way that satisfies the criteria of availability [Arts. 10 to 20] (but for certain names published in synonymy see Article 50.7). If a work is by more than one person but it is clear from the contents that only one of these is responsible for the name or act, then that person is the author; otherwise the author of the work is deemed to be the author of the name or act. If the author, or the person who publishes the work, cannot be determined from the contents, then the name or act is deemed to be anonymous (see Article 14 for the availability of anonymous names and nomenclatural acts).
50.1.1. However, if it is clear from the contents that some person other than an author of the work is alone responsible both for the name or act and for satisfying the criteria of availability other than actual publication, then that other person is the author of the name or act. If the identity of that other person is not explicit in the work itself, then the author is deemed to be the person who publishes the work.
50.1.2. In the case of original fixation of a type species by the deliberate employment of a species-group name in the sense of a previous misidentification, the person who deliberately uses the misidentification is deemed to be the author of a new specific name [Arts. 11.10, 67.13 and 70.4].
50.1.3. The provisions of this Chapter apply also to joint authors.
Example. The binomen Dasyurus laniarius (Mammalia) was published in an account of expeditions of which Mitchell (1838) is the author. The specific name laniarius in this binomen and the description of the taxon are contained in a letter from Owen to Mitchell that the latter published verbatim (explicitly demonstrating in the work itself that Owen alone was responsible both for the name and for the description which made it available). Owen is the author of D. laniarius, not Mitchell.
Recommendation 50A. Multiple authors. When a name is proposed in a multi-authored work, but only one (or some) of the authors is (are) directly responsible for the name and satisfying the criteria that make the name available, then the author(s) directly responsible should be identified explicitly. Co-authors of the whole work who have not had such direct responsibility for the name should not automatically be included as authors of the name. See Recommendation 51E for citing the names of such authors.
50.2. Authorship of names in reports of meetings. If the name of a taxon is made available by publication in a report or minutes of a meeting, the person responsible for the name, not the Secretary or other reporter of the meeting, is the author of the name.
Recommendation 50B. Information in minutes. Secretaries and other reporters of meetings should not include in their published reports new scientific names or nomenclatural acts.
50.3. Authorship unaffected by changes in rank or combination.
50.3.1. The authorship of the name of a nominal taxon within the family group, genus group or species group is not affected by the rank at which it is used. But if an infrasubspecific name that otherwise satisfies the criteria of availability is used in a manner that makes it available for a species or subspecies, its author is the one who first so uses it [Arts. 10.2, 45.5.1].
50.3.2. Change in generic combination of a species-group name does not affect its authorship (see Article 51.3 for the use of parentheses to indicate changed combinations).
50.4. Authorship of justified emendations. A justified emendation is attributed to the author of the name in its original incorrect spelling and not to the person making the emendation [Arts. 19.2, 33.2.2].
50.5. Authorship of unjustified emendations. An unjustified emendation is attributed to the author who first publishes it [Art. 33.2.3].
50.6. Authorship of a name published simultaneously by different authors. When two or more identical names for the same taxonomic taxon are published on the same date, by different authors in the same or different works, their precedence (and hence the authorship of the name) is determined by the application of Article 24.
Example. The name Zygomaturus keani (Mammalia) was published for the first time by Stirton and by Plane in two different papers in the same publication (1967). Different specimens are described in the two papers. Although Plane attributed the name to Stirton, the material described in Plane's paper is not the same as that in Stirton's and, hence, Plane was the sole author of the name in that place. Mahoney & Ride (1975) as First Revisers [Art. 24.2.2] gave precedence to Stirton's work and name (following Plane's intentions - see Recommendation 24B), and so the author of the name is Stirton and the type specimens are those fixed by him.
50.7. Authorship of names first published as junior synonyms. If a scientific name (taken, for example, from a label or manuscript) was first published in the synonymy of an available name and became available before 1961 through the provisions of Article 11.6, its author is the person who published it as a synonym, even if some other originator is cited, and is not the person who subsequently adopted it as a valid name [Art. 11.6].
Recommendation 50C. Authorship of excluded or unavailable names. When it is desirable, for bibliographic or other reasons, to refer to an excluded [Art. 1.3] or unavailable name, the authorship should be attributed to the person who published it with that status, unless that author cited some other person as the originator (for citation and examples see Recommendation 51F).
Preamble | Articles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 | Glossary Appendices Constitution
| FranciscoWelterSchultes | A passage should be added: "50.8. Spelling of authors' names. The spelling of the author is to be taken from the title page of the work in which the available name was established (modified to the nominatice case if originally given in the genitive case). Special characters must be conserved." Examples: Linnæus, 1758; Linné, 1766. A ruling is needed because zoologists are undecided which names to use. In botany exist official lists of names of authors, and their official abbreviations. The situation in zoology is much more complex, many authors were spelled in different ways and bibliographers and scientists are undecided which ones should be regarded as more or less official. The international library catalogues' conventional name for the founder of zoological nomenlature is Linné, but zoologists tend to use Linnaeus. There is no other and easier solution than to use the name as printed on the title page of the corresponding work. This is also in the general spirit of the high importance of original spellings in zoological nomenclature. |
2008-10-07 11:31:27 | ||
| FranciscoWelterSchultes | Another passage is needed: "50.1.4. Authors of figures (engravers, photographers etc.) are regarded as artists and not as scientific authors or co-authors in the sense of this article." In malacology we have some species established on the base of a name and a figure (without descriptive text), and where the figure was explicitely attributed to a different person. The authors of figures were traditionally not cited as co-authors of the corresponding new names. |
2008-10-07 11:41:58 | ||
| FranciscoWelterSchultes | 50.1 needs to be generally more explicite. To 50.1.1 should be added: "Citing the name of a different author behind a new name alone is not sufficient to provide evidence that the other person was fully or partly responsible for the name. This concerns also cases where it is clear from external evidence that the entire descriptive text was originally written by the other person, and literally cited from an unpublished manuscript." This concerns for example Reeve's names, who in his monograph Conchologica Iconica frequently mentioned names previously reported by other zoologists in meetings of the Zoological Society of London, which was a prerequisite for publication in the Society's journal. The journal issues often appeared shortly after Reeve had published the corresponding sections of his monograph. Author of those names is Reeve alone. To 50.1.3 should be added: "If only part of the description was cited (for example in quotation marks) from the manuscript of an explicitely mentioned different author, then authorship is by both co-authors. If not otherwise stated in the original publication, the first author of the name shall be the author of the work." Example: Clausilia cattaroensis was described in Rossmässler's work from 1835, who cited the species as ''Cl. cattaroensis'' Ziegler, gave a brief description and added a short passage by Ziegler which he cited in quotation marks. The name of the species must be ''Clausilia cattaroensis'' Rossmässler & Ziegler, 1835. (At present we have no idea how to proceed in such cases, especially the way of order of co-authors in such cases is totally unclear). |
2008-10-07 12:28:42 | ||
| FranciscoWelterSchultes | A new passage 50.1.5 should be added: "Names of genera established without description but with one or more species included always take the authorship of the author of the work, regardless of any other statement." Example: Tyrrheniberus (Gastropoda) was established by Kobelt in his work from 1904 (Iconographie) who at different occasions gave "Hesse & Kobelt" or "Kobelt & Hesse" as author of the new name. The name was exclusively based on 8 included species, no description was added. Author must be Kobelt, 1904 alone. A new passage 50.1.6 should be added: "Nomina nuda and otherwise unavailable names have always the authorship of the author of the work, regardless of any other statements." Also this passage is needed and would be helpful because in malacology we have such cases. |
2008-10-07 12:28:57 | ||
