Suppr超能文献

“内弯足”的奇案:十足目甲壳动物的第 50.1 条、第 50.1.1 条与引证——一种解决办法。

The curious case of "innies": Articles 50.1, 50.1.1 and the citation of authorities in Decapoda Crustacea-a way forward.

机构信息

Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PW, United Kingdom..

出版信息

Zootaxa. 2021 Apr 16;4963(1):zootaxa.4963.1.8. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4963.1.8.

Abstract

In the majority of species and genus names in Decapoda Crustacea, the author(s) of the name equate with the author(s) of the work. In a relatively small number of cases, however, the author(s) of the name are either a subset of the authors of the work or are not an author on the work-a phenomenon herein termed "innies". We demonstrate that these two categories should be differentially interpreted according to Articles 50.1 and 50.1.1 of the ICZN Code. To promote stability in cited authorship of historical names, it is proposed that 1) if the author(s) of the name are also an author on the work, these should be universally accepted as "innies", irrespective of any further explanation in the text (including a mere attribution following the taxon name); and 2) that if the author(s) of the name are not an author(s) of the work, these should only be considered as "innies" if a more expansive explanation is given in the text, not merely an attribution of authorship to the taxon name.

摘要

在十足目甲壳动物的大多数种名和属名中,命名者等同于著作的作者。然而,在相对较少的情况下,命名者是著作作者的子集,或者不是著作的作者——这种现象在此被称为“内名”。我们证明,这两个类别应根据《国际动物命名法规》第 50.1 条和第 50.1.1 条进行不同的解释。为了促进历史名称中被引作者身份的稳定性,我们建议:1)如果命名者也是著作的作者,无论在文本中是否有进一步的解释(包括在分类群名称之后的简单归因),这些都应被普遍视为“内名”;2)如果命名者不是著作的作者,只有在文本中给出更广泛的解释,而不仅仅是将作者身份归因于分类群名称时,这些才应被视为“内名”。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验