ArticleFrontiers in physiology2022
Beyond a biased binary: A perspective on the misconceptions, challenges, and implications of studying females in avian behavioral endocrinology.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hidden in plain sound: the scientific potential of house mouse squeaks.Biology letters · 2025Review
- Repeated behavioural evolution is associated with convergence of gene expression in cavity-nesting songbirds.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- Six-decade research bias towards fancy and familiar bird species.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Terminology in ecology and evolutionary biology disproportionately harms marginalized groups.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Sex diversity in the 21st century: Concepts, frameworks, and approaches for the future of neuroendocrinology.Hormones and behavior · 2024Article
- Sex differences in aggressive intensities and brain steroids during status resolution in a sex changing fish, Lythrypnus dalli.Hormones and behavior · 2023Article
- Androgen-armoured amazons: reversed sex roles in coucals are associated with testosterone in females but not males.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For decades, avian endocrinology has been informed by male perspectives and male-focused research, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of female birds. Male birds have been favored as research subjects because their reproductive behaviors are considered more conspicuous and their reproductive physiology is presumably less complex than female birds. However, female birds should not be ignored, as female reproductive behavior and physiology are essential for the propagation of all avian species. Endocrine research in female birds has made much progress in the last 20 years, but a substantial disparity in knowledge between male and female endocrinology persists. In this perspective piece, we provide examples of why ornithology has neglected female endocrinology, and we propose considerations for field and laboratory techniques to facilitate future studies. We highlight recent advances that showcase the importance of female avian endocrinology, and we challenge historic applications of an oversimplified, male-biased lens. We further provide examples of species for which avian behavior differs from the stereotypically described behaviors of male and female birds, warning investigators of the pitfalls in approaching endocrinology with a binary bias. We hope this piece will inspire investigators to engage in more comprehensive studies with female birds, to close the knowledge gap between the sexes, and to look beyond the binary when drawing conclusions about what is 'male' versus 'female' biology.
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.