Understanding author choices in the current conservation publishing landscape.

Conservation literature addresses a broad spectrum of interdisciplinary questions and benefits. Conservation science benefits most when a diverse range of authors are represented, particularly those from countries where much conservation work is focused. In other disciplines, it is well known that barriers and biases exist in the academic publishing sphere, which can affect research dissemination and an author's career development. We used a discrete choice experiment to determine how 7 journal attributes affect authors' choices of where to publish in conservation. We targeted authors directly by contacting authors published in 18 target journals and indirectly via communication channels for conservation organizations. We only included respondents who had previously published in a conservation-related journal. We used a multinomial logit model and a latent class model to investigate preferences for all respondents and distinct subpopulations. We identified 3 demographic groups across 1038 respondents (older authors from predominantly middle-income countries, younger authors from predominantly middle-income countries, and younger authors from high-income countries) who had published in conservation journals. Each group exhibited different publishing preferences. Only 2 attributes showed a consistent response across groups: cost to publish negatively affected journal choice, including authors in high-income countries, and authors had a consistent preference for double-blind review. Authors from middle-income countries were willing to pay more for society-owned journals, unlike authors from high-income countries. Journals with a broad geographical scope that were open access and that had relatively high impact factors were preferred by 2 of the 3 demographic groups. However, journal scope and open access were more important in dictating journal choice than impact factor. Overall, different demographics had different preferences for journals and were limited in their selection based on attributes such as open access policy. However, the scarcity of respondents from low-income countries (2% of respondents) highlights the pervasive barriers to representation in conservation research. We recommend journals offer double-blind review, reduce or remove open access fees, investigate options for free editorial support, and better acknowledge the value of local-scale single-species studies. Academic societies in particular must reflect on how their journals support conservation and conservation professionals.

Comprensión de las elecciones de los autores en el entorno actual de publicaciones sobre la conservación Resumen La bibliografía sobre conservación aborda un amplio espectro de preguntas y beneficios interdisciplinarios. La mayor parte de ella representa una gama diversa de autores, sobre todo de países en los que se centra gran parte del trabajo de conservación. Es bien sabido que en otras disciplinas existen barreras y sesgos en el ámbito de la publicación académica que pueden afectar a la difusión de la investigación y al desarrollo de la carrera de un autor. Usamos un experimento de elección discreta para determinar cómo afectan siete atributos de las revistas sobre conservación en la elección de los autores sobre en cuál publicar. Nos dirigimos directamente a los autores y nos pusimos en contacto con quienes publicaban en 18 revistas objetivo e indirectamente a través de los canales de comunicación de las organizaciones de conservación. Sólo incluimos a los encuestados que habían publicado anteriormente en una revista relacionada con la conservación. Usamos un modelo logit multinominal y un modelo de clases latentes para investigar las preferencias de todos los encuestados y de las distintas subpoblaciones. Identificamos tres grupos demográficos entre los 1038 encuestados (autores de más edad de países con predominancia de ingresos medios, autores más jóvenes de países con predominancia de ingresos medios y autores más jóvenes de países con ingresos altos) que habían publicado en revistas de conservación. Cada grupo mostraba preferencias editoriales diferentes. Sólo dos atributos mostraron una respuesta coherente en todos los grupos: el costo de la publicación afectaba negativamente a la elección de la revista, incluidos los autores de países con ingresos altos, y los autores tenían una preferencia coherente por la revisión doble ciego. Los autores de países con ingresos medios están dispuestos a pagar más por las revistas pertenecientes a la sociedad, a diferencia de los autores de países de ingresos altos. Dos de los tres grupos demográficos prefieren las revistas de ámbito geográfico amplio, de acceso abierto y con un factor de impacto relativamente alto. Sin embargo, el alcance de la revista y el acceso abierto fueron más importantes que el factor de impacto. En general, los distintos grupos demográficos tenían preferencias diferentes en cuanto a las revistas y su selección se veía limitada por atributos como la política de acceso abierto. No obstante, la falta de encuestados procedentes de países con bajos ingresos (2% de los encuestados) destaca las barreras generalizadas para la representación en la investigación sobre conservación. Recomendamos que las revistas ofrezcan revisiones doble ciego, reduzcan o eliminen las tarifas de acceso abierto, investiguen opciones de apoyo editorial gratuito y reconozcan mejor el valor de los estudios de una sola especie a escala local. Las sociedades académicas, en particular, deben reflexionar sobre la forma en que sus revistas apoyan la conservación y a los profesionales de la conservación.

Overcoming racism in the twin spheres of conservation science and practice.

It is time to acknowledge and overcome conservation's deep-seated systemic racism, which has historically marginalized Black, Indigenous and people of colour (BIPOC) communities and continues to do so. We describe how the mutually reinforcing 'twin spheres' of conservation science and conservation practice perpetuate this systemic racism. We trace how institutional structures in conservation science (e.g. degree programmes, support and advancement opportunities, course syllabuses) can systematically produce conservation graduates with partial and problematic conceptions of conservation's history and contemporary purposes. Many of these graduates go on to work in conservation practice, reproducing conservation's colonial history by contributing to programmes based on outmoded conservation models that disproportionately harm rural BIPOC communities and further restrict access and inclusion for BIPOC conservationists. We provide practical, actionable proposals for breaking vicious cycles of racism in the system of conservation we have with virtuous cycles of inclusion, equality, equity and participation in the system of conservation we want.

Sex-specific social aging in wild African lions.

There is a growing interest in social behavior change with age,1,2,3,4,5 and the impacts of sociality on longevity,6,7,8 but current knowledge is broadly limited to primates, societies structured by dominance hierarchies, or single-sex studies. It is less clear how social aging patterns emerge in carnivores. The African lion (Panthera leo), a species that lives in egalitarian fission-fusion societies, presents an exceptional opportunity to examine social aging. Across felids, lions are unique in their dependence on conspecifics for many essential processes,9,10,11 and there is vast knowledge of lion behavioral ecology,10,11,12,13,14 including documented reproductive senescence in both sexes.14,15 Applying spatial-social network analyses across 30 years of data on the wild Serengeti lion population, we show that sex strongly modulates patterns of social aging and longevity. Group size increased with age for both sexes, but only males experienced significant changes in associate numbers (degree), specifically to females, which peaked in mid-life before declining. While aging females experienced declines in intra-sex connectivity (strength) and bond strength (mean strength), they peaked in both to males during mid-life. Male inter-sex strength also peaked in mid-life, while conversely their intra-sex strength and mean strength significantly dipped in mid-life. Although social associations were important for survival in both sexes, the investment diverged significantly: females' overall network connectivity was key for longevity, while the number of associates was important for males. These findings illustrate important potential effects of social aging in a wild carnivore and demonstrate how these diverge strongly between the sexes.