is used, and the earlier author is listed alone. For example: 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.) Examples The following forms of citation are all equally correct: Rubus ursinus Cham. & Schldl. Rubus ursinus Cham. et Schldl. Rubus ursinus von Chamisso & von Schlechtendal Rubus ursinus von Chamisso et von Schlechtendal As indicated above, either the original or the revising author may involve multiple words, as per the following examples from the same genus: Helianthemum sect. Atlanthemum (Raynaud) G.López, Ortega Oliv. & Romero García Helianthemum apenninum Mill. subsp. rothmaleri (Villar ex Rothm.) M.Mayor & Fern.Benito Helianthemum conquense (Borja & Rivas Goday ex G.López) Mateo & V.J.Arán Resó Usage of the ancillary term "in" The ancillary term "in" is sometimes employed to indicate that the authorship of the published work is different from that of the name itself, for example: Verrucaria aethiobola Wahlenb. in Acharius, Methodus, Suppl.: 17. 1803 Article 46.2 Note 1 of the Botanical Code indicates that in such cases, the portion commencing "in" is in fact a bibliographic citation and should not be used without the place of publication being included, thus the preferred form of the name+author alone in this example would be Verrucaria aethiobola Wahlenb., not Verrucaria aethiobola Wahlenb. in Acharius. (This is in contrast to the situation in zoology, where either form is permissible, and in addition a date would normally be appended.) Authorship of subsidiary ranks According to the botanical Code it is only necessary to cite the author for the lowest rank of the taxon in question, i.e. for the example subspecies given above (Helianthemum apenninum subsp. rothmaleri) it is not necessary (or even recommended) to cite the authority of the species ("Mill.") as well as that of the subspecies, though this is found in some sources. The only exception to this rule is where the nominate variety or subspecies of a species is cited, which automatically will inherit the same authorship of its parent taxon,Article 26.1 thus: Rosa gallica L. var. gallica, not "Rosa gallica var. gallica L." Emending authors As described in Article 47 of the botanical code, on occasion either the diagnostic characters