Setting path to bst files installed by TexLive

Question

I installed TexLive 2013 from the installer provided at CTAN on Ubuntu Linux. I have been able to use latex and pdflatex commands so far, but I have a problem with bibtex. Is there any setting (such as exporting an environmental variable) that I needed to make to let bibtex know where .bst files are?

The bibtex command does not seem to recognize the .bst files stored under texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/revtex/, texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/natbib/, etc.

However, the .bst files under texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/base/ seem to be recognized.

The style file I actually want to use is texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/revtex/aipnum4-1.bst. If I do $ kpsewhich aipnum4-1.bst I get nothing.

I didn't change anything on the tex system after I installed the TexLive 2013. I didn't add a file manually, or I didn't update the TexLive.

---

Edit

According to the comment, I am adding a small example. The following set of sample.tex and fa.bib can be compiled to a PDF with pdflatex and bibtex. The plain.bst is under texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/base/. If I change \bibliographystyle to aipnum4-1 or the other styles commented out, the reference section is not produced, and the citation is noted by a question mark.

sample.tex

\documentclass{article} 

\begin{document}

This is the minimum story I heard from the king of Elephants. \cite{pa}

\bibliography{fa.bib}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
% .. works
%\bibliographystyle{aipnum4-1}
% .. does not work
%\bibliographystyle{siam}
%\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
%\bibliographystyle{plainnat}

\end{document}

fa.bib

@Article{pa,
  author =   {Elegant Elephant},
  title =    {Eggs of Elephants are Elegant},
  journal =  {Elite Elephants},
  year =     {2399},
  volume =   3,
  pages =    447,
}

---

Edit 2

I found that my setting of PATH environmental variable (as well as MANPATH and INFOPATH) was inappropriate. I had set them in /etc/profile as

INFOPATH=$INFOPATH:/usr/local/texlive/2013/texmf-dist/doc/info
MANPATH=$MANPATH:/usr/local/texlive/2013/texmf-dist/doc/man
PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/texlive/2013/bin/x86_64-linux

I corrected it to

INFOPATH=/usr/local/texlive/2013/texmf-dist/doc/info:$INFOPATH; export INFOPATH
MANPATH=/usr/local/texlive/2013/texmf-dist/doc/man:$MANPATH; export MANPATH
PATH=/usr/local/texlive/2013/bin/x86_64-linux:$PATH; export PATH

My Ubuntu package manager seems to have installed its own tex system under /usr/share/texlive/ and /usr/share/texmf/, probably because another package depends on the tex package.

With the first, wrong setting of PATH, ubuntu installation of tex-related executables had precedence over my installation of texlive 2013 directly from CTAN. For example, kpsewhich at /usr/bin/kpsewhich was used instead of /usr/local/texlive/2013/bin/x86_64-linux/kpsewhich. As a result, when I did

kpsewhich plain.bst

I got

/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/base/plain.bst

which was installed by ubuntu's tex package. This package installed only bibtex/bst/base/ but not bibtex/bst/revtex/ or other bst directories, kpsewhich aipnum4-1.bst resulted in empty string.

Now, with the corrected PATH setting,

kpsewhich aipnum4-1.bst

returns

/usr/local/texlive/2013/texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/revtex/aipnum4-1.bst

The above sample tex file can be compiled to a PDF with any of the bst files listed in the comment.

It looks that ubuntu's tex package did not install pdflatex, and I had used /usr/local/texlive/2013/bin/x86_64-linux/pdflatex happily so far.

I realized my mistake while reading this answer:

https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/273893/62461