Cargando…
A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities
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. Ou...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Academy of Sciences
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10013813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36853942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2217564120 |
_version_ | 1784906857912991744 |
---|---|
author | Marks, Rose A. Amézquita, Erik J. Percival, Sarah Rougon-Cardoso, Alejandra Chibici-Revneanu, Claudia Tebele, Shandry M. Farrant, Jill M. Chitwood, Daniel H. VanBuren, Robert |
author_facet | Marks, Rose A. Amézquita, Erik J. Percival, Sarah Rougon-Cardoso, Alejandra Chibici-Revneanu, Claudia Tebele, Shandry M. Farrant, Jill M. Chitwood, Daniel H. VanBuren, Robert |
author_sort | Marks, Rose A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10013813 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | National Academy of Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100138132023-08-28 A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities Marks, Rose A. Amézquita, Erik J. Percival, Sarah Rougon-Cardoso, Alejandra Chibici-Revneanu, Claudia Tebele, Shandry M. Farrant, Jill M. Chitwood, Daniel H. VanBuren, Robert Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Biological Sciences 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. National Academy of Sciences 2023-02-28 2023-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10013813/ /pubmed/36853942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2217564120 Text en Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Biological Sciences Marks, Rose A. Amézquita, Erik J. Percival, Sarah Rougon-Cardoso, Alejandra Chibici-Revneanu, Claudia Tebele, Shandry M. Farrant, Jill M. Chitwood, Daniel H. VanBuren, Robert A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title | A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title_full | A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title_fullStr | A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title_full_unstemmed | A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title_short | A critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
title_sort | critical analysis of plant science literature reveals ongoing inequities |
topic | Biological Sciences |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10013813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36853942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2217564120 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marksrosea acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT amezquitaerikj acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT percivalsarah acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT rougoncardosoalejandra acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT chibicirevneanuclaudia acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT tebeleshandrym acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT farrantjillm acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT chitwooddanielh acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT vanburenrobert acriticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT marksrosea criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT amezquitaerikj criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT percivalsarah criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT rougoncardosoalejandra criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT chibicirevneanuclaudia criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT tebeleshandrym criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT farrantjillm criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT chitwooddanielh criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities AT vanburenrobert criticalanalysisofplantscienceliteraturerevealsongoinginequities |