Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Colonial history and global economics distort our understanding of deep-time biodiversity

Open access
Raja, Nussaïbah B., Dunne, Emma M., Matiwane, Aviwe, Khan, Tasnuva Ming, Nätscher, Paulina S., Ghilardi, Aline M., Chattopadhyay, Devapriya·2021·Nature Ecology & Evolution

Abstract

Sampling biases in the fossil record distort estimates of past biodiversity. However, these biases not only reflect the geological and spatial aspects of the fossil record, but also the historical and current collation of fossil data. We demonstrate how the legacy of colonialism and socioeconomic factors, such as wealth, education and political stability, impact the global distribution of fossil data over the past 30 years. We find that a global power imbalance persists in palaeontology, with researchers in high- or upper-middle-income countries holding a monopoly over palaeontological knowledge production by contributing to 97% of fossil data. As a result, some countries or regions tend to be better sampled than others, ultimately leading to heterogeneous spatial sampling across the globe. This illustrates how efforts to mitigate sampling biases to obtain a truly representative view of past biodiversity are not disconnected from the aim of diversifying and decolonizing our discipline. Analysing the global distribution, source and authorship of fossil research over the past 30 years, the authors find that researchers in high- or upper-middle-income countries hold a monopoly over palaeontological knowledge production, contributing to 97% of fossil data in the Paleobiology Database, leading to disenfranchisement of researchers in lower-income countries and biased spatial sampling across the globe.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41559-021-01608-8

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Cited by

See all 259

Metadata

Authors
Raja, N. B., Dunne, E. M., Matiwane, A., Khan, T. M., Nätscher, P. S., Ghilardi, A. M., & Chattopadhyay, D.
Venue
Nature Ecology & Evolution
Published
2021-12-30
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
145-154
ISSN
2397-334X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4220673914
Cited by
259
References
45
FWCI
164.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Colonial history and global economics distort our understanding of deep-time biodiversity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41559-021-01608-8
The paper
Raja, N. B., Dunne, E. M., Matiwane, A., Khan, T. M., Nätscher, P. S., Ghilardi, A. M., & Chattopadhyay, D. (2021). Colonial history and global economics distort our understanding of deep-time biodiversity. Nature Ecology & Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01608-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.