| Autor: |
Marks RA; Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.; Plant Resilience Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.; Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa., Amézquita EJ; Department of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824., Percival S; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824., Rougon-Cardoso A; Laboratory of Agrigenomic Sciences, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, La Escuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores Unidad León, León 37689, México.; Plantec National Laboratory, ENES-León, León 37689, México., Chibici-Revneanu C; Intercultural Development and Management, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, ENES-León, León 37689, México., Tebele SM; Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa., Farrant JM; Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa., Chitwood DH; Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.; Department of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824., VanBuren R; Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.; Plant Resilience Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824. |
| Abstrakt: |
The field of plant science has grown dramatically in the past two decades, but global disparities and systemic inequalities persist. Here, we analyzed ~300,000 papers published over the past two decades to quantify disparities across nations, genders, and taxonomy in the plant science literature. Our analyses reveal striking geographical biases-affluent nations dominate the publishing landscape and vast areas of the globe have virtually no footprint in the literature. Authors in Northern America are cited nearly twice as many times as authors based in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, despite publishing in journals with similar impact factors. Gender imbalances are similarly stark and show remarkably little improvement over time. Some of the most affluent nations have extremely male biased publication records, despite supposed improvements in gender equality. In addition, we find that most studies focus on economically important crop and model species, and a wealth of biodiversity is underrepresented in the literature. Taken together, our analyses reveal a problematic system of publication, with persistent imbalances that poorly capture the global wealth of scientific knowledge and biological diversity. We conclude by highlighting disparities that can be addressed immediately and offer suggestions for long-term solutions to improve equity in the plant sciences. |
