Here, we explore the first preprints uploaded to EcoEvoRxiv to characterise preprint practices in ecology and evolution. We aim to understand: 1) in what countries authors who use EcoEvoRxiv are located; 2) the taxonomic diversity of study systems across preprints; 3) whether preprint server use depends on career stage and gender; 4) the extent to which authors make use of preprint servers for reports and community-driven peer review; 5) the extent to which data and code are shared in preprints; and 6) how many preprints remain unpublished, and for those that are published, how long it took for them to become published. In the process, we also provide a summary of what makes EcoEvoRxiv distinct from other preprint servers to help further clarify the benefits of using community-driven preprint servers to disseminate research findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Noble et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: