The ‘blockbuster’ drug, Ozempic, was created with the help of a most unlikely source: the saliva of a humble lizard. And spiders and scorpions have led to the development of life-saving medicines. But, of the 1.5 million animal species known to live on planet Earth (with many more yet to be discovered), just a fraction of them — mainly vertebrates — monopolise scientific research and literary attention, undermining scientific breakthroughs, find two new studies.
Scientists from the University of New South Wales, Australia (UNSW) sifted through 1,383,803 research papers worldwide on ecology and evolution and found, for instance, that even though birds and mammals comprise less than 1 per cent of animal biodiversity, they dominate both conservation and research efforts. The studies were published in the journal Ecology and Evolution here and here. They added that vertebrates appear in 53.9 per cent of all papers in this field, although they represent only 4.7 per cent of animal biodiversity
On the other hand, the authors discovered that species-rich invertebrate groups, such as arachnids and insects “are often relegated to taxonomically specialised journals, which probably reach a narrower audience.” This strong taxonomic bias, or ‘taxonomical chauvinism’ (disproportionate attention given to some taxa relative to their diversity) was found across papers on ecology and evolution.
Untangling the bias
“We also observed that studies on vertebrates, relative to those on invertebrates, were more prevalent in higher impact journals and, within journals, received more citations and mentions in the media,” wrote the authors. Sometimes invertebrates such as parasites sneak in to the literature, but “only… because of their association with vertebrates.”
The studies go on to untangle this bias, and ponder over the factors that could shape an ecologist’s or evolutionary biologist’s choices of the organisms they study.
One reason, they said could be attributed to mundane factors such as the logistical ease of study, or societal relevance, especially when it came to major animal groups. Next, they could be linked to the prominence of certain organisms within peer networks “or early-career exposure to specific taxa.”
Finally “emotional factors” could shape the choice of research, including taxonomic affinities: for instance, the movie Finding Nemo, “is an example of how culture can influence people’s perception of nature and encourage people to pursue a scientific career,” lead author Pietro Pollo, from UNSW Science told The Hindu.
Even zoos everywhere in the world are usually filled with big mammals, so people know what a lion or a giraffe is, but they rarely know much about the animals living near them (especially invertebrates). The researchers found evidence that people study animals they are “fond of”: those they think are pretty, cute, interesting, or fascinating, showing how the cultural factors that we are all exposed to can influence scientists’ decisions, Dr. Pollo added.
Stifling medical innovation
The bias doesn’t just stop at scientific literature: it goes beyond, to grants awarded, biodiversity databases, conservation or reintroduction projects and textbooks. “For example, vertebrates, especially birds and mammals, often concentrate conservation and research efforts even though they represent only a minute portion of existing animals,” said a paper.
This scientific “hyperfocus” on certain organisms slows innovation: “We should diversify our research as much as we can, casting a wider net to increase our chances of ‘winning the jackpot’,” said Dr. Pollo.
Divya Uma, a biology professor at Azim Premji University, concurred with these findings. “Since humans are visual creatures, the attention, even in popular media, focusses more on larger, charismatic mammals,” she told The Hindu. She added that indeed, any subject that affects humans immediately or directly “is perceived to be important,”: for instance, research on human health and diseases gets more funding worldwide.
The authors of the UNSW papers propose a series of targeted actions to ameliorate taxonomic imbalances in ecology and evolution, such as outreach initiatives featuring neglected taxa, taxonomically equitable education and taxonomically diverse research experiences. This inequity, can after all, “stifle innovation in medicine and engineering,” they added.
Published – October 29, 2026 11:47 am IST
