0

I tried everything that is in the answer of this question: "Question mark or bold citation key instead of citation number", but I still have the same warnings.

Here are the warnings I get when I run the first compilation with Latex :

"Warning line 35 : Citation `...' on page 4 undefined"

"Warning line 1 : There were undefined references".

I verified everything: - I run Latex > Bibtex > Latex > Latex - I have a .blg file with the reference that I want to cite - I used a default style in Latex : \bibliographystyle{alpha} - My database (biblio.bib) is in the same folder than my .tex file and is unique (I created it with zotero) - I verify that the key of my reference in the .bib file is the same that the one I typed in \cite{...}

Could someone help me please?

Here is a copy of my .tex file and my .bib file, to make it easier to understand:

memoire_RBT_TA_MeHg.tex:

documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[french]{babel}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[top=2.5cm, bottom=2.5cm, left=2.5cm, right=2.5cm]{geometry}
\title{Etude des interactions entre les acides gras et le méthylmercure sur la différenciation et les fonctions du tissu adipeux chez la truite arc-en-ciel (\textit{Oncorhynchus mykiss})}
\author{Marine Courteille}
\date{2016 - 2017}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\newpage
\tableofcontents
\newpage
\section{Préambule}

My text ...
\cite{wood_homeostasis_2012}

\bibliographystyle{alpha}
\bibliography{biblio}
\end{document}

biblio.bib:

@book{wood_homeostasis_2012,
    edition = {Elsevier},
    series = {Fish {Physiology} {Series}},
    title = {Homeostasis and {Toxicology} of {Non}-{Essential} {Metals}},
    volume = {31B},
    author = {Wood, Chris P. and Farrell, Anthony P. and Brauner, Colin J.},
    year = {2012},
    file = {Farrel11_FishPhysiologyHomeostasisToxicologyNonEssentialMetals.pdf:C\:\\Users\\Marine\\AppData\\Roaming\\Zotero\\Zotero\\Profiles\\ji38u2t3.default\\zotero\\storage\\CIEQMEVN\\Farrel11_FishPhysiologyHomeostasisToxicologyNonEssentialMetals.pdf:application/pdf}
}

@article{babiarz_partitioning_2001,
    title = {Partitioning of {Total} {Mercury} and {Methylmercury} to the {Colloidal} {Phase} in {Freshwaters}},
    volume = {35},
    issn = {0013-936X},
    url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es010895v},
    doi = {10.1021/es010895v},
    abstract = {Using tangential flow ultrafiltration, total mercury (HgT) and methylmercury (MeHg) concentrations in the colloidal phase (0.4 μm−10 kDa) were determined for 15 freshwaters located in the upper Midwest (Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin) and the Southern United States (Georgia and Florida). Unfiltered concentrations were typical of those reported for freshwater and ranged from 0.9 to 27.1 ng L-1 HgT and from 0.08 to 0.86 ng L-1 MeHg. For some rivers, HgT and MeHg in the colloidal phase comprised up to 72\% of the respective unfiltered concentration. On average, however, HgT and MeHg concentrations were evenly distributed between the particulate ({\textgreater}0.4 μm), colloidal, and dissolved ({\textless}10 kDa) phases. The pool of Hg in the colloidal phase decreased with increasing specific conductance. Results from experiments on freshwaters with artificially elevated specific conductance suggest that HgT and MeHg may partition to different subfractions of colloidal material. The colloidal-phase HgT correlation with filtered organic carbon (OCF) was generally poor (r2 {\textless} 0.14; p {\textgreater} 0.07), but the regression of MeHg with OCF was strong, especially in the upper Midwest (r2 = 0.78; p {\textless} 0.01). On a mass basis, colloidal-phase Hg concentrations were similar to those of unimpacted sediments in the Midwest. Mercury to carbon ratios averaged 352 pg of HgT/mg of C and 25 pg of MeHg/mg of C and were not correlated to ionic strength. The log of the partition coefficient (log KD) for HgT and MeHg ranged from 3.7 to 6.4 and was typical of freshwater values determined using a 0.4 μm cutoff between the particulate phase and the dissolved phase. Log KD calculated using the {\textless}10 kDa fraction as “dissolved” ranged from 4.3 to 6.6 and had a smaller standard deviation about the mean. In addition, our data support the “particle concentration effect” (PCE) hypothesis that the association of Hg with colloids in the filter-passing fraction can lower the observed log KD. The similarity between colloidal and particulate-phase partition coefficients suggests that colloidal mass and not preferential colloidal partitioning drives the PCE.},
    number = {24},
    urldate = {2017-05-01},
    journal = {Environmental Science \& Technology},
    author = {Babiarz, Christopher L. and Hurley, James P. and Hoffmann, Stephen R. and Andren, Anders W. and Shafer, Martin M. and Armstrong, David E.},
    month = dec,
    year = {2001},
    pages = {4773--4782},
    file = {ACS Full Text PDF w/ Links:C\:\\Users\\Marine\\AppData\\Roaming\\Zotero\\Zotero\\Profiles\\ji38u2t3.default\\zotero\\storage\\KQC39GD8\\Babiarz et al. - 2001 - Partitioning of Total Mercury and Methylmercury to.pdf:application/pdf;ACS Full Text Snapshot:C\:\\Users\\Marine\\AppData\\Roaming\\Zotero\\Zotero\\Profiles\\ji38u2t3.default\\zotero\\storage\\8T277BSC\\es010895v.html:text/html}
}

closed as unclear what you're asking by Andrew Swann, Mensch, TeXnician, Stefan Pinnow, Paul Gaborit Oct 20 '17 at 23:43

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Welcome to TeX.SE! – Zarko May 20 '17 at 17:00
  • Assuming that you meant: "latex > bibtex > latex > latex", I did just that, with your sources, and there was nothing wrong. Are you indeed running latex twice after bibtex? – nickie May 20 '17 at 18:49
  • Oh yes of course it's latex > bibtex > latex > latex, sorry I was a little bit tired when I wrote my question. – Marine Courteille May 21 '17 at 20:02
2

I tried to install Latex again on my computer but it didn't change anything. I also had the idea to try to use Texstudio instead of Texmaker as editor and, oh miracle, it worked ! It gives me a bibliography and proper citations in the text. So, I still don't know why it didn't work, but if someone has the same problem, I recommend to try another text editor.

  • Same thing just happened to me. this is weird as TeXstudio is just a fork of TeXmaker! – Foad Jan 30 '18 at 10:42
0

I just test these two files. It works fine and references are generated properly. It looks no problem based on your description. You could try to copy these two files to a new folder and re-compile it.

  • Thank you for your answer. I tried to copy everything in new files, but it still doesn't work. I'm really surprised that it works for you. Is it possible that I installed something wrong? I followed a small course about Latex at university (only 4 hours) and I've done exactly what they told me. I'm working on PC (not mac), so I installed Miktex as software distribution and Texmaker as editor. I tried another file which worked on the computer of the university, but it doesn't work on my computer. Maybe is it a question of compatibility? – Marine Courteille May 21 '17 at 20:09
  • To be more accurate, here are the warnings I received. - when I do the first run of "Latex": "There were undefined references" and "Citation `wood_homeostasis_2012' on page 3 undefined" - when I run "Bibtex": "Warning--empty publisher in wood_homeostasis_2012 (There was 1 warning)" – Marine Courteille May 21 '17 at 20:15
  • @MarineCourteille I am not worried about the warning of ""Warning--empty publisher in wood_homeostasis_2012" because you don't have a publisher field in bib file. I use TeXnicCenter to run the two files you provided. It went through fine with a few minor problems due to the French language. But I suggest you to cite the other reference \cite{babiarz_partitioning_2001} to see if it gives you the same undefined reference. If it does, it means there may be something wrong with your LaTex setup and compilation. – Roy May 26 '17 at 17:54
  • Thanks, but I'm now using Texstudio instead of Texmaker as editor, and it works (cfr my answer of Wednesday). I guess it is a problem with Texmaker installation, I don't know what but never mind, I'm going to use Texstudio now ;-) – Marine Courteille May 28 '17 at 13:49

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