Women in evolution - highlighting the changing face of evolutionary biology

Evolutionary Applications

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 3-16

  Wellenreuther, Maren ^a,b   Otto, Sarah ^c  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Equality; Evolutionary biology; Gender; Women in science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84954407798     PISSN: 17524563     EISSN: 17524571     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/eva.12343     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aitken, S. N., and J. B. Bemmels 2016. Time to get moving: assisted gene flow of forest trees. Evolutionary Applications 9:271-290.
2. Aktipis, A. 2016. Principles of cooperation across systems: from human sharing to multicellularity and cancer. Evolutionary Applications 9:17-36.
3. Aubin-Horth, N. 2016. Using an integrative approach to investigate the evolution of behaviour. Evolutionary Applications 9:166-180.
4. Barnett, R. C., and L. Sabattini 2009. A short history of women in science: from stone walls to invisible walls. In: T. Science, ed. The Science on Women and Science. Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC.
5. Budden, A. E., T. Tregenza, L. W. Aarssen, J. Koricheva, R. Leimu, and C. J. Lortie 2008. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23:4-6.
6. Charlesworth, D. 2016. The status of supergenes in the 21st century: recombination suppression in Batesian mimicry and sex chromosomes and other complex adaptations. Evolutionary Applications 9:74-90.
7. Charmantier, A., C. Doutrelant, G. Dubuc Messier, A. Fargevieille, and M. Szulkin 2016. Mediterranean blue tits as a case study of local adaptation. Evolutionary Applications 9:135-152.
8. Cho, A. H., S. A. Johnson, C. E. Schuman, J. M. Adler, O. Gonzalez, S. J. Graves, J. R. Huebner et al. 2014. Women are underrepresented on the editorial boards of journals in environmental biology and natural resource management. PeerJ 2:e542.
9. Clancy, K. B. H., R. G. Nelson, J. N. Rutherford, and K. Hinde 2014. Survey of Academic Field Experiences (SAFE): trainees report harassment and assault. PLoS One 9:e102172.
10. Conley, D., and J. Stadmark 2012. Gender matters: a call to commission more women writers. Nature 488:590.
11. Council of Canadian Academies. 2012. Strengthening Canada's research capacity: the gender dimension.
12. Darwin, C. R. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, 1st edn. Murray, London.
13. England, P., and S. Li 2006. Desegregation stalled the changing gender composition of college majors, 1971-2002. Gender & Society 20:657-677.
14. Etzkowitz, H., C. Kemelgor, and B. Uzzi 2000. Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology, 1 edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15. Fang, F. C., J. W. Bennett, and A. Casadevall 2013. Males are overrepresented among life science researchers committing scientific misconduct. MBio 4:e00640-12.
16. Fara, P. 2015. Women, science and suffrage in World War I. Notes and Records of the Royal Society 69:11-24.
17. Gartler, S. M. 2006. The chromosome number in humans: a brief history. Nature Reviews Genetics 7:655-660.
18. Gautier, M., and P. S. Harper 2009. Fiftieth anniversary of trisomy 21: returning to a discovery. Human Genetics 126:317-324.
19. Gillespie, R. G. 2016. Island time and the interplay between ecology & evolution in species diversification. Evolutionary Applications 9:53-73.
20. Glazer, A. M. 2015. There ain't nothing like a Dame: a commentary on Lonsdale (1947)'Divergent beam X-ray photography of crystals'. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 373:20140232.
21. Haig, S. M., R. M. Bellinger, H. M. Draheim, D. M. Mercer, M. P. Miller, and T. D. Mullins 2016. An integrative approach to single species conservation genetics over the past 35 years. Evolutionary Applications 9:181-195.
22. Harper, P. S. 2006. The discovery of the human chromosome number in Lund, 1955-1956. Human Genetics 119:226-232.
23. Harvey, J. 2012. The mystery of the nobel laureate and his vanishing wife. In For Better or For Worse? Collaborative Couples in the Sciences Volume 44 of the series Science Networks. Historical Studies, chapter 4, pp. 57-77 Springer, Basel.
24. Horowitz, H. L. 1986. The 1960s and the transformation of campus cultures. History of Education Quarterly 26:1-38.
25. Johannesson, K. 2016. What can be learnt from a snail? Evolutionary Applications 9:153-165.
26. Jones, C. G., and S. Hawkins . 2014. Women and science. Notes and Records of the Royal Society:rsnr20140056.
27. Jones, T. M., K. V. Fanson, R. Lanfear, M. R. E. Symonds, and M. Higgie 2014. Gender differences in conference presentations: a consequence of self-selection? PeerJ 2:e627.
28. Lane, N. J. 1999. Why are there so few women in science. Nature debates 19:1999.
29. Latu, I. M., M. S. Mast, J. Lammers, and D. Bombari 2013. Successful female leaders empower women's behavior in leadership tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49:444-448.
30. Lederberg, E. M. 1950. Lysogenicity in Escherichia coli strain K-12. Microbial Genetics Bulletin 1:5-9.
31. Lee. 2016. Evolutionary mechanisms of habitat invasions, using the copepod Eurytemora affinis as a model system. Evolutionary Applications 9:248-270.
32. Leftwich, P. T., M. Bolton, and T. Chapman . 2016. Evolutionary biology and genetic techniques for insect control. Evolutionary Applications 9:212-230.
33. Lejeune, J., M. Gauthier, and R. Turpin . 1959. Les chromosomes humains en culture de tissus: Gauthier-Villars/Editions Elsevier 23 RUE LINOIS, 75015 PARIS, FRANCE.
34. Leslie, S.-J., A. Cimpian, M. Meyer, and E. Freeland 2015. Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science 347:262-265.
35. Luckerath-Rovers, M. 2013. Women on boards and firm performance. Journal of Management and Governance 17:491-509.
36. Mankkinen, T. 1999. Walking the academic tightrope: sexual harassment at the University of Helsinki. In P. Fogelberg, ed. Hard Work in the Academy: Research and Interventions on Gender Inequalities in Higher Education, pp. 219-221. Helsinki University Press, Helsinki.
37. Mason, J. 1991. Hertha Ayrton (1854-1923) and the admission of women to the Royal Society of London. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 45:201-220.
38. Moss-Racusin, C. A., J. F. Dovidio, V. L. Brescoll, M. J. Graham, and J. Handelsman 2012. Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109:16474-16479.
39. Myers, J. H., and J. S. Cory 2016. Ecology and evolution of pathogens in natural populations of Lepidoptera. Evolutionary Applications 9:231-247.
40. Namrata, G., C. Kemelgor, S. Fuchs, and H. Etzkowitz 2005. Triple burden on women in science: a cross-cultural analysis. Current Science 89.
41. NSF. 2013. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. In Special Report NSF 13-304: NSF Arlington, VA.
42. Ohta, T. 2012. Tomoko Ohta. Current Biology 22:R618-R619.
43. Olivieri, I., J. Tonnabel, O. Ronce, and A. Mignot 2016. Why evolution matters for species conservation: perspectives from three case studies of plant metapopulations. Evolutionary Applications 9:196-211.
44. Orr, M. 2014. Women peers in the scientific realm: Sarah Bowdich (Lee)'s expert collaborations with Georges Cuvier, 1825-33. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London.
45. Pain, E. 2014. After more than 50 years, a dispute over Down Syndrome discovery. Science 343:720-721.
46. Penczykowski, R. M., A.-L. Laine, and B. Koskella 2016. Understanding the ecology and evolution of host-parasite interactions across scales. Evolutionary Applications 9:37-52.
47. Qvarnström, A., M. Ålund, S. Eryn McFarlane, and P. M. Sirkiä 2016. Climate adaptation and speciation: particular focus on reproductive barriers in Ficedula flycatchers. Evolutionary Applications 9:119-134.
48. Reuben, E., P. Sapienza, and L. Zingales 2014. How stereotypes impair women's careers in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111:4403-4408.
49. Richards, E. 1997. Redrawing the boundaries: darwinian science and Victorian women intellectuals. Victorian science in context 6:119-142.
50. Schiebinger, L. 1993. Women in science: historical perspectives. Paper read at Women at work: a meeting on the status of women in astronomy held at the Space Telescope Science Institute, September 8-9, 1992.
51. Schroeder, J., H. L. Dugdale, R. Radersma, M. Hinsch, D. M. Buehler, J. Saul, L. Porter et al. 2013. Fewer invited talks by women in evolutionary biology symposia. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 26:2063-2069.
52. Selden, W. K. 2000. Women of Princeton: 1746-1969. Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.
53. Servedio, M. R. 2016. Geography, assortative mating, and the effects of sexual selection on speciation with gene flow. Evolutionary Applications 9:91-102.
54. Shen, H. 2013. Mind the gender gap. Nature 495:22-24.
55. Sonnert, G., and G. James Holton . 1995. Who Succeeds in Science?: The Gender Dimension: Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.
56. Sork, V. L. 2016. Gene flow and natural selection shape spatial patterns of genes in tree populations: a career perspective. Evolutionary Applications 9:291-310.
57. Ulrich, L. T. 2004. Yards and Gates: Gender in Harvard and Radcliffe History. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
58. Wellenreuther, M., and R. Sánchez-Guillén 2016. Non-adaptive radiation in damselflies. Evolutionary Applications 9:103-118.
59. Wennerås, C., and A. Wold 1997. Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature 387:341-343.
60. West, J. D., J. Jacquet, M. M. King, S. J. Correll, and C. T. Bergstrom 2013. The role of gender in scholarly authorship. PLoS One 8:e66212.
61. Wobbe, T. 2002. Die longue durée von Frauen in der Wissenschaft: orte, Organisationen, Anerkennung. In Frauen in Akademie und Wissenschaft: Arbeitsorte und Forschungspraktiken 1700-2000, vol 10. pp. 1-28. Forschungsberichte der interdisziplinären Arbeitsgruppen der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin.
62. Women on Boards: Davies Review Annual Report. 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/women-on-boards-2015-fourth-annual-review (accessed on 17 October 2015).
63. Zuk, M., and G. Rosenqvist 2005. Evaluation bias hits women who aren't twice as good. Nature 438:559.