"ex" in authorship was: "fide" in authorship

Dipteryx dipteryx at FREELER.NL
Thu Jun 27 09:27:33 CDT 2002

This raises another question. The zoological usage of "ex" as "derived from"
or "credited to" is what one would expect from the Latin "ex". The botanical
usage "published by" is anti-intuitive, the more so since "Smith in Jones"
is shortened to "Smith" while "Smith ex Jones" is shortened to Jones.

I have long wondered what is the background of this botanical usage and how
it came to be. Does anybody know?

Paul van Rijckevorsel

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Pyle <deepreef at BISHOPMUSEUM.ORG>

Wrong again!  I just confirmed that in zoological contexts, the case of
"Smith (ex Jones)" means that the *name* was credited to Jones, but the
description (including original examination of specimens, etc.) was provided
by Smith.

More information about the Taxacom mailing list