4

For 2 references, how would I produce textual citations such that

Statement (species A: author1 date1; species B: ref2)

I tried \citep[species A:][]{ref1}[species B:][]{ref2}, but it doesn't seem to work..

  • 2
    In that case you better use \parencites[species A:][]{ref1}[species B:][]{ref2} (notice the s). The natbib compatibility commands are just wrappers around their biblatex counterparts (so \citep is actually a \parencite; there are exceptions for the starred versions) and do not have multi-cite support (as indeed natbib does not). – moewe Apr 29 '14 at 6:36
  • Wanna make that an answer? – Johannes_B Dec 6 '14 at 13:32
  • @moewe ^^^^ ;-) – Johannes_B Dec 6 '14 at 14:02
  • @Johannes_B There you are. – moewe Apr 7 '15 at 6:20
3

You are looking for a multi-cite version of \citep. That does not really exist, but since biblatex's natbib commands are just wrappers around their standard counterparts, \citep is really \parencite (exceptions apply for the starred versions: \citep* is not \parencite*, it is \AtNextCite{\defcounter{maxnames}{999}\parencite). The multi-cite version for \parencite is \parencites, so you want

\parencites[species A:][]{ref1}[species B:][]{ref2}
  • old thread, but this doesn't seem to work with nature style biblatex? \parencites{cite1, cite2}[see][for review]{cite3} produced weird ([cite 1, cite2]; [see cite3 for review]) – Sharah Sep 3 '18 at 21:32
  • @Sharah I get "[1, 2, see 3, for review]". If it does not work for you, please open a new question with an MWE, the output you get and the output you expect to see instead. I seem to remember you are using Overleaf and as I pointed out before their package versions are slowly becoming outdated. So it may well be that this was a bug in the package that has been fixed in newer versions. – moewe Sep 4 '18 at 4:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.