Journal list menu

Volume 10, Issue 4 p. 195-201
Review

Mapping where ecologists work: biases in the global distribution of terrestrial ecological observations

Laura J Martin

Corresponding Author

Laura J Martin

Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

([email protected])Search for more papers by this author
Bernd Blossey

Bernd Blossey

Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

Search for more papers by this author
Erle Ellis

Erle Ellis

Department of Geography & Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 30 March 2012
Citations: 343

Abstract

Although the geographical context of ecological observations shapes ecological theory, the global distribution of ecological studies has never been analyzed. Here, we document the global distribution and context (protected status, biome, anthrome, and net primary productivity) of 2573 terrestrial study sites reported in recent publications (2004–2009) of 10 highly cited ecology journals. We find evidence of several geographical biases, including overrepresentation of protected areas, temperate deciduous woodlands, and wealthy countries. Even within densely settled or agricultural regions, ecologists tend to study “natural” fragments. Such biases in trendsetting journals may limit the scalability of ecological theory and hinder conservation efforts in the 75% of the terrestrial world where humans live and work.