Missing year in quality-2 parse

[jar398]

Similar examples have a value in the Year column; don't know why this one doesn't.

gnparser "Ozimops kitcheneri Reardon, McKenzie, & Adams in Reardon, McKenzie, S. J. B. Cooper, Appleton, Carthew, & Adams, 2014"
Id,Verbatim,Cardinality,CanonicalStem,CanonicalSimple,CanonicalFull,Authorship,Year,Quality
2ab21aa7-aa39-56e4-ba40-b1b8cd2ac0ae,"Ozimops kitcheneri Reardon, McKenzie, & Adams in Reardon, McKenzie, S. J. B. Cooper, Appleton, Carthew, & Adams, 2014",2,Ozimops kitchener,Ozimops kitcheneri,Ozimops kitcheneri,"Reardon, Mc Kenzie & Adams ex Reardon, Mc Kenzie, S. J. B. Cooper, Appleton, Carthew & Adams 2014",,2

[dimus]

@jar398 good catch, I think in such situation as in your example: Aus bus A. in B. 1888 the year from ex authors should be presented as a year of a name.

[jar398]

Yeah I would think so too - in this case another string for the same taxonomic name is without the 'ex' and the authors and year are those for the 'ex'... I would think the reason for doing 'ex' is to provide the publication that makes the name available, in which case the year would be the year of publication, as usual? But then I'm not a taxonomist.

[jar398]

I'm also a bit concerned about the spaces after Mc but can report that as a separate issue

[dimus]

Neither am I a taxonomist, but what taxonomists told me, ex and in for botanical names (Aus bus A. ex B.) means that author A. described species but did not jump through all hoops, and later B. described species properly based on the original description by A.

For example B. found a herbarium a sheet with new species collected by A. with a description attached, then used A's description in a publication.

In ICZN as I undertstand it is opposite, and A. would properly publish unfinished description by B.. Also, as I understand by ICZN ex B. mention of original author is concidered unnecessary, so the name in question strictly speaking should probably be: Ozimops kitcheneri Reardon, McKenzie & Adams, 2014

However, as I understand, people do not always follow the rules and in zoological names sometimes do add ex authors, or even use botanical ex format.

[dimus]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Author_citation_(botany)#Usage_of_the_term_%22ex%22

    Andropogon aromaticus Sieber ex Schult.

indicates that Josef Schultes validly published this name (in 1824 in this instance), 
but his description was based on an earlier description by Franz Sieber. (Note that
 in botany, the author of the earlier name precedes the later, valid one; in zoology, 
this sequence (where present) is reversed.) 

Also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Author_citation_(zoology)