ASM citation styles

Dear Zotero

The citation style of all the journals of the American society for Microbiology is not 100% correct. How could this be changed?

Regards

Charlotte
  • What issues have you come across?
  • The comma should be right after the last name of the authors, the numbers in the text should be in only one pair of brackets if more than one paper is cyted.

    This is not 100% correct

    (16), (46).
    Seo Y. S., U. Srinivasan, K. Oh, J. Shin, J. D. Chae, M. Y. Kim, J. H. Yang, H. Yoon, B. Miller, J. DeBusscher, B. Foxman, and M. Ki. 2010. Changing molecular epidemiology of group B streptococcus in Korea. J. Korean Med. Sci 25:817-823.

    Instead it should be like this:

    (1, 12)

    Isaza, R., and C. J. Ketz. 1999. A trunk wash technique for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in elephants. Verh. Erkrg. Zootiere 39:121–124.
    Lyashchenko, K. P., R. Greenwald, J. Esfandiari, et al. Tuberculosis in elephants: antibody responses to defined antigens of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, potential for early diagnosis, and monitoring of treatment. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 13:722–732.

    Thank you ever so much

    Charlotte
  • The style should do this correctly. Are you using the "multiple sources" button in the plugin? If so, which version of Zotero?
    And you got the style of the Zotero repository, right?
  • edited February 16, 2011
    I corrected the comma issue, and the corrected style should make it into the style repository shortly. As adamsmith already indicated, the style should handle citation grouping just fine if you use the "multiple sources" button (see http://www.zotero.org/support/word_processor_plugin_usage ).

    A more significant issue that I'm aware of is the handling of name particles. According to ASM style (excerpt from personal correspondence):
    particles in the surnames should be included in the surname and considered when alphabetizing the references, e.g., as follows:

    van den Heuvel, B.
    van Maris, T.
    von Braun, W."
    Zotero 2.0.9 sorts entries in the bibliography by ignoring lowercase particles (so the order becomes 1: von Braun, 2: van den Heuvel, 3: van Maris). I fixed this for my own ASM manuscripts by capitalizing the first particle in my Zotero library, so the sort order would become 1: Van den Heuvel, 2: Van Maris, 3: Von Braun, and, after I finished the manuscript, lowercasing the particles by hand.

    This work-around isn't needed anymore with Zotero 2.1 (currently in beta), which supports CSL 1.0, which has a setting for how particles should be handled ( http://citationstyles.org/downloads/upgrade-notes.html#name-particles ). You'll need a CSL 1.0 ASM style though for which this option is set. If you want to try that, let me know, and I'll create one (you don't have to bother with this if you don't cite any items where the first author has a lowercase particle).
  • Thank you so much for your help. Things are sorted now.

    Warm regards

    Charlotte
  • I updated the CSL 1.0 style for ASM journals. It should now sort name particles correctly. I also set the default locale to US English (ASM being American). This style is available at https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/raw/master/asm-journals.csl
  • I am using the British Ecological Society Journals style and still seem to have an issue with name particles in the bibliographic sort. For example "van de Pol 2006" and "van Houtan 2011" are sorted, respectively, with P and H. When I change the value for demote-non-dropping-particle to "never", then these two references are placed at the very end of the bibliography (even after Y). I do have "van de Pol" and "van Houtan" entered into the family name field, which I assumed make the particle non-dropping. When I make "van" upper case, it is sorted with V.

    I am using Firefox 3.6.17 and Zotero 2.1.7.

    Thanks
  • It works fine here with Zotero 2.1.7 (and you're entering your names correctly). Do you get the expected sort order with the American Society for Microbiology style? (you can install that one via http://www.zotero.org/styles )
  • I don't get the expected sort order with ASM. "van" still is placed at the very end of the Bibliography.

    FYI, I am using an older version of Word (Word 2003).
  • Well, there are several ways to troubleshoot this. Does the sorting problem occur with csledit.xul (see http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/citation_styles#editing_csl_styles )? Does the problem occur in a fresh document? Does the problem occur with a different set of items (maybe the problem is with the item with the Y-author)?
  • I tried a few things.

    1. In csledit.xul the unmodified besj style does not sort as desired (sorts instead by first UPPER CASE word in family name). The modified style (with demote-non-dropping-particle = "never") does sort as expected (by first word in family name even if it is lower case), as does the ASM style.
    2. Putting items in a fresh Word document still doesn't produce the expected sorting sequence.
    3. I tried other references, including a different one containing "van". It does not seem to make a difference.
    4. I tried it on a different computer with Word 2010 (also with Zotero 2.1.8). The behavior is unchanged, EXCEPT an additional issue cropped up - italics and standard text are toggled, i.e., author and title are italics whereas the journal name is not (opposite of what the style codes and what appears in csledit). I suspect this last issue has something to do with a setting in Word, but I am not sure what that might be.

    I can adopt you workaround of making the particle uppercase - I hate to burn up your time. It's just odd that it sorts differently in csledit than it does in a word document.
  • no, you're not burning anyone's time, on the contrary - these are very detailed and helpful reports and if there is a problem/bug it needs to get fixed.
    The fact that
    1 and 2/3 produce different results strongly suggests a bug to me.

    Forget about #4 for the moment, I think that's a distraction.

    So that we can replicate them - what are the exact settings on the two computers -
    we have Zotero, FF, and Word version for computer 1 - I'd also want to know which language FF is in as well as the operating system in both cases.

    Another thing that I'd be curious about is how a bibliography looks that you create from inside Zotero using "Create Bibliography from selected items".
  • It looks the like the sort order is as expected (like csledit) when I create bibliography from selected items. That is, when I use the modified besj style.

    Computer 1 is Win XP Pro with Service pack 3
    Computer 2 is Win 7 Pro (32 bit)
    FF language is en-US in both cases (Computer 2 has FF 3.6.10 -I haven't updated it yet).

    I figured out the italics issue - simply that Word had italics set as default.
  • edited June 15, 2011
    I get correct output for the "American Society for Microbiology" style and Word 2010. I just checked, and I'm already updated to Zotero 2.1.8 (with Firefox 4.0.1 and the Zotero WinWord Integration 3.1 plugin).
  • Firefox 3.6 issue maybe? That looks like the only difference I can see.
  • @gestauffer,

    We have a new tool that allows us to capture the exact input seen by the citation formatter in your document. If you're willing to give it a try, it should tell whether your sort issue is reproducible on other systems. Here are the steps:
    • Install the CSL Feedback Gadget from here
    • Join the CSL Test Submission group
    • In a test document, click on the bibliography, then do Zotero "Edit Bibliography".
    • Open a bibliography entry for editing, and click on the "submit test" button.
    • Sync Zotero to send the test data to the group.
    If you're using a modified style, we'll also need that. You can paste it into gist.github.com, save it as a public gist, and post the URL from the address bar back here.
  • I could try if you still think it necessary. However, I just updated to FF 4.0.1, and it does sort as expected now.
    I apparently forgot the rule to always update everything before you report an error!
    Thanks all for helping me out with this.
  • Excellent. No need for further testing, then.
Sign In or Register to comment.