Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
More than two million species have been described so far, but our knowledge on most taxa remains scarce or inexistent, and the available biodiversity data is often taxonomically, phylogenetically and spatially biased. Unevenness in research effort across species or regions can interact with data biases and compromise our ability to properly study and conserve biodiversity. Herein, we assess the influence of biological, conservation, geographic and socioeconomic correlates of reptile research effort globally and across six biogeographic realms. We combine bibliometric data from the Scopus database with trait‐based approaches and provide research effort information for 10 531 reptile species, modelling it as a function of 10 putative correlates of species‐level variation in research effort through negative binomial generalised mixed effect models. We show that reptile research effort is highly skewed toward certain taxa and regions, such as turtles, crocodiles, tuatara, viperids, pythons and some anguimorph lizards, as well as for temperate compared to tropical regions. Our findings indicate that greater research attention is directed towards large‐sized and early described reptile species, particularly those whose geographic range overlap with biodiversity institutions. Although we demonstrate that biological and socioeconomic factors more strongly affect reptile research effort variation, geography and conservation‐related factors also matter. Global patterns are mostly consistent, but variation across realms were observed and likely reflects differences in socioeconomic attributes as well as in the amount of species to be studied in each realm. Directing researchers and citizen scientists' attention toward understudied taxa will contribute to alleviate this biased biodiversity knowledge, although the sheer amount of species in tropical regions inevitably makes it a long‐term solution. Performing comparative studies across species with similar levels of research attention could represent a more immediate and feasible alternative.
Guedes et al. (Thu,) studied this question.