Figure 1:
The DNA barcode commons described within the KC-IAD Framework (Frischmann et al. 2014).
Figure 2:
Summary of findings situated in the KC-IAD.
Figure 3:
The DNA Barcode Pipeline (pipeline image reproduced with permission from CBOL (Consortium for the Barcode of Life 2015)).
Figure 4:
The number of articles citing four seminal barcode papers, published each year during 2003–2014, and percent of articles with at least one author from the specified income group of countries. Income levels are as defined by the World Bank Country and Lending Groups (World Bank 2016).
Figure 5:
Co-authorship in the DNA barcoding publication database. Each node represents an author, and size of node indicates relative number of times the author has been mentioned in the database. Each line between nodes indicates that the authors co-authored a publication. Lines in grey indicate collaborations restricted to Western HICs. The coloured lines represent collaborations with other regions (United Nations DGACM 2016).
Table 1:
Percent of 3557 publications by geographic regions of residence of author sets (excluding 80 publications with author sets spanning more than 2 regions).
| Westˆ | East Europe | Latin* | Africa | Asia+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Westˆ | 53.9 | 3.5 | 5.3 | 2.6 | 7.5 |
| East Europe | 3.5 | 2.3 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.2 |
| Latin* | 5.3 | 0.4 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
| Africa | 2.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.1 |
| Asia+ | 7.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 17.3 |
Darker shading indicates a higher proportion of publications with some or all authors from the region. Bolded numbers indicate author sets restricted to a particular region.
ˆCanada, US, Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand.
*Latin American and the Caribbean.
+Asia and the Pacific.
Table 2:
Odds Ratios (ORs) for the association between income level of an authors’ country of residence and publication in a high impact journal for 3557 publications that cited four seminal DNA barcoding papers.
| N | OR | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Income level | |||
| Only high income country authors | 2386 | 1.0 | |
| Mix of high and middle or low income country authors | 615 | 0.76 | 0.54–1.1 |
| Only middle or low | 556 | 0.09 | 0.04–0.23 |
OR, odds ratio.
Table 3:
Number of published medicinal plant records in BOLD by income level of country where the specimen was collected.
| n (% of total published records on BOLD) | n (% of total published records on BOLD) | n (% of records with storage site) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low income | 50 | 3 (6%) | 47 (94%) | 3 (100%) |
| Low-middle income | 640 | 395 (62%) | 245 (38%) | 33 (8%) |
| Upper-middle income | 4698 | 4226 (90%) | 472 (10%) | 142 (3%) |
| High income | 6297 | 4853 (77%) | 1444 (23%) | 102 (2%) |
| Total | 11,685 | 9477 (81%) | 2208 (19%) | 280 (3%) |
Table 4:
Number of published Aedes sp., Anopheles sp. or Culex sp. records in BOLD by income level of country where the specimen was collected.
| n (% of total published records on BOLD) | n (% of total published records on BOLD) | n (% of records with storage site) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low income | 313 | 1 (0%) | 312 (99%) | 1 (100%) |
| Low-middle income | 2817 | 1577 (56%) | 1240 (44%) | 88 (6%) |
| Upper-middle income | 3312 | 1251 (38%) | 2061 (62%) | 944 (76%) |
| High income | 10,855 | 9414 (87%) | 1441 (13%) | 1488 (16%) |
| Total | 17,297 | 12,243 (71%) | 5054 (29%) | 2521 (21%) |