Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Global inequity in scientific names and who they honor

Shane DuBay, Daniela H. Palmer, Natalia Piland
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.09.243238
Shane DuBay
1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dubaysg@umich.edu d.h.palmer@sheffield.ac.uk npiland@uchicago.edu
Daniela H. Palmer
2Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dubaysg@umich.edu d.h.palmer@sheffield.ac.uk npiland@uchicago.edu
Natalia Piland
3Committee on Evolutionary Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
4Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: dubaysg@umich.edu d.h.palmer@sheffield.ac.uk npiland@uchicago.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Linnaean taxonomy is a cornerstone of Western biology in which organisms are given a two-part name (a genus and species), creating biological units that help us order and manage our knowledge of the living world. In this system, the names of species themselves take on additional functions, such as describing features of the organism or honoring individuals (known as eponyms). Here, we interrogate how power and authority over the natural world are claimed through Western scientific naming practices to evaluate the legacies of imperialism, dispossession, and exclusion in these practices. We compile and analyze a dataset of all bird species descriptions from 1950 to present, asking: who has access and power to name species, and who is honored in species names? We show that 95% of newly described species are described from the global South, but the majority of species and eponyms are described by authors, and named after individuals, from the global North. We find an increase through time in authors from the global South, which is associated with a rise in eponyms that honor individuals from global South countries. However, this formal inclusion of global South authors has not translated into increases in first authorship (a primary form of credit and authority in Western science). We contextualize these disparities in naming and authorship within broader global structures of access and power put in place through centuries of European and U.S. imperialism, but a historical perspective alone ignores institutional and individual agency and incentives in present-day actions. As we increasingly reflect on the social foundations and impacts of our science, these findings show how research and labor in the global South continue to be disproportionately translated into power and authority in the global North, upholding and re-enacting imperial structures of domination.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 29, 2020.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Global inequity in scientific names and who they honor
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Global inequity in scientific names and who they honor
Shane DuBay, Daniela H. Palmer, Natalia Piland
bioRxiv 2020.08.09.243238; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.09.243238
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Global inequity in scientific names and who they honor
Shane DuBay, Daniela H. Palmer, Natalia Piland
bioRxiv 2020.08.09.243238; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.09.243238

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Zoology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (3512)
  • Biochemistry (7352)
  • Bioengineering (5329)
  • Bioinformatics (20277)
  • Biophysics (10026)
  • Cancer Biology (7749)
  • Cell Biology (11319)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (6440)
  • Ecology (9958)
  • Epidemiology (2065)
  • Evolutionary Biology (13336)
  • Genetics (9362)
  • Genomics (12592)
  • Immunology (7714)
  • Microbiology (19046)
  • Molecular Biology (7447)
  • Neuroscience (41063)
  • Paleontology (300)
  • Pathology (1231)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2139)
  • Physiology (3164)
  • Plant Biology (6866)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1274)
  • Synthetic Biology (1898)
  • Systems Biology (5318)
  • Zoology (1089)