The curious case of “innies”: Articles 50.1, 50.1.1 and the citation of authorities in Decapoda Crustacea—a way forward
De Grave, S.; Ng, P.K.L. (2021). The curious case of “innies”: Articles 50.1, 50.1.1 and the citation of authorities in Decapoda Crustacea—a way forward. Zootaxa 4963(1): 163-172. https://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4963.1.8
In: Zootaxa. Magnolia Press: Auckland. ISSN 1175-5326; e-ISSN 1175-5334, more
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.
All data in the Integrated Marine Information System (IMIS) is subject to the VLIZ privacy policy
