ArticlePloS one2019
Male principal investigators (almost) don't publish with women in ecology and zoology.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural barriers drive gender inequality across academic careers in Brazilian ecology.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dragon Kill Points: applying a transparent working template to relieve authorship stress.BMC biology · 2026Review
- When Matilda shows up: The double-edged impact of women researchers' media visibility in management science.PloS one · 2026Article
- Do Manuscripts by Female Evolutionary Biologists Spend Longer Under Review?Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Exploring individual biases in BCI research and users: Does gender matter?Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Trends in research approaches and gender in plant ecology dissertations over four decades.Ecology and evolution · 2024Review
- Over twenty years of publications in Ecology: Over-contribution of women reveals a new dimension of gender bias.PloS one · 2024Article
- Gender shapes the formation of review paper collaborations in microbiology.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Gender differences in animal cognition science.Animal cognition · 2023Article
- Article
- Community voices: sowing, germinating, flourishing as strategies to support inclusion in STEM.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Article
- Preprinting is positively associated with early career researcher status in ecology and evolution.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Gender parity in scientific authorship in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a bibliometric analysis.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Towards women-inclusive ecology: Representation, behavior, and perception of women at an international conference.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- Correction: Male principal investigators (almost) don't publish with women in ecology and zoology.PloS one · 2020Article
- When mycologists describe new species, not all relevant information is provided (clearly enough).MycoKeys · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Representation of women in science drops substantially at each career stage, from early student to senior investigator. Disparities in opportunities for women to contribute to research metrics, such as distinguished speaker events and authorship, have been reported in many fields in the U.S.A. and Europe. However, whether female representation in scientific contributions differs in other regions, such as Latin America, is not well understood. In this study, in order to determine whether female authorship is influenced by gender or institutional location of the last (senior) author or by subfield within ecology, we gathered author information from 6849 articles in ten ecological and zoological journals that publish research articles either in or out of Latin America. We found that female authorship has risen marginally since 2002 (27 to 31%), and varies among Latin American countries, but not between Latin America and other regions. Last author gender predicted female co-authorship across all journals and regions, as research groups led by women published with over 60% female co-authors whereas those led by men published with less than 20% female co-authors. Our findings suggest that implicit biases and stereotype threats that women face in male-led laboratories could be sources of female withdrawal and leaky pipelines in ecology and zoology. Accordingly, we encourage every PI to self-evaluate their lifetime percentage of female co-authors. Female role models and cultural shifts-especially by male senior authors-are crucial for female retention and unbiased participation in science.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.