Fewer than three percent of land plant species named by women: Author gender over 260 years

Abstract

How has women's contribution to science developed over multiple generations? We present the first quantitative analysis of the role played by women in publishing botanical species names, and the first complete analysis of women's contribution to a field of science with a timeframe of more than 260 years. The International Plant Names Index and The Plant List were used to analyse the contribution of female authors to the publication of land plant species names. Authors of land plant species were automatically assigned as male or female using Wikipedia articles and manual research. Female authors make up 12.20% of the total number of authors, and they published 2.82% of names. Half of the female authors published 1.5 or more names, while half the male authors published 3 or more names. Female contribution has accounted for more than 1% of new species names since 1900, and now stands at 11.97%. The difference in productivity between male and female authors has declined over time, and female authors are now 80% as productive as their male counterparts. In spite of botany's traditional image as a feminine pursuit, women's contribution was not significantly reflected in species authorship until the twentieth century, around the same time as in other branches of science.

The number of known plants species in the world and its annual increase

“…During ages of exploration in the 18 th and 19 th Centuries, spikes in numbers of published new species names can be observed. Peaks in species description are particularly noticeable in the periods between 1830-1850 and 1890-1920, when per decade over 35,000 species names were proposed (Lindon et al 2015; note that this data includes new species, new names and new combinations). These corresponded with major taxonomic works (e.g.…”

“…Siebold & Zuccarini 1837-1870, Martius 1840-1906, Boissier 1843-1859, Miquel 1855-1859, when species delimitation became more closely scrutinised. Currently the numbers of new species published per decade (excluding new combinations) has stabilised around 20,000 per decade (Lindon et al 2015). An average of ca 2,000 new species are now published annually, although the last years there seems to be a slight decline and we can only hope that this is not a continuing trend (Fig.…”

The Uses of Herbaria in Botanical Research. A Review Based on Evidence From Argentina

“…Furthermore, there are examples that women are under-paid compared to men (Shen, 2013), and that their research is less likely to receive funding (Ley and Hamilton, 2008; Ranga et al, 2012). Although Botany has historically been seen as suitable for women (Lindon et al, 2015), our results show a strong gender bias, which is also a global tendency among natural science and academia. Other studies within Botany’s subdisciplines have arrived at similar conclusions, e.g.…”

“…Other studies within Botany’s subdisciplines have arrived at similar conclusions, e.g. nomenclature (Lindon et al, 2015) and ethnobotany not only considering women as authors but also as a subject of study (Howard-Borjas, 2001; Howard, 2006).…”

Wikidata and the bibliography of life

“…There are several databases of taxonomists that have representation in Wikidata, although coverage in Wikidata is variable. For example, the International Plant Names Index (IPNI) contained approximately 43,000 authors in 2013 (Lindon et al, 2015), currently some 53,073 Wikidata items have IPNI author ids. At the time of writing ( 2021) ZooBank (Pyle & Michel, 2008) contains some 79,000 authors, of which 15,833 are in Wikidata.…”