Trends in Chondrichthyan Research: An Analysis of Three Decades of Conference Abstracts
Given the conservation status and ecological, cultural, and commercial importance of chondrichthyan fishes, it is valuable to evaluate the extent to which research attention is spread across taxa and geographic locations and to assess the degree to which scientific research is appropriately addressing the challenges they face. Here we review trends in research effort over three decades (1985–2016) through content analysis of every abstract (n = 2,701) presented at the annual conference of the American Elasmobranch Society (AES), the oldest and largest professional society focused on the scientific study and management of these fishes. The most common research areas of AES abstracts were reproductive biology, movement/telemetry, age and growth, population genetics, and diet/feeding ecology, with different areas of focus for different study species or families. The most commonly studied species were large and charismatic (e.g., White Shark, Carcharodon carcharias), easily accessible to long-term established field research programs (e.g., Lemon Shark, Negaprion brevirostris, and Sandbar Shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus), or easily kept in aquaria for lab-based research (e.g., Bonnethead Shark, Sphyrna tiburo). Nearly 90% of all described chondrichthyan species have never been mentioned in an AES abstract, including some of the most threatened species in the Americas. The proportion of female* first authors has increased over time, though many current female* Society members are graduate students. Nearly half of all research presented at AES occurred in the waters of the United States rather than in the waters of developing nations where there are more threatened species and few resources for research or management. Presentations based on research areas such as paleontology and aquarium-based research have declined in frequency over time, and identified research priorities such as social science and interdisciplinary research are poorly represented. Possible research gaps and future research priorities for the study of chondrichthyan fishes are also discussed.

The number of abstracts each year.

The most common research areas of abstracts submitted to the American Elasmobranch Society. For definitions and examples of each, see Supplemental Appendix 1 (see Data Accessibility).

(A) The number of Movement/Telemetry research area abstracts that used acoustic or satellite telemetry by year. (B) The number of Diet/Feeding Ecology research area abstracts that used stable isotope analysis or stomach content analysis by year.

(A) The proportion of abstracts with female* first authors by year. (B) The percentage of AES abstracts each year that focused on paleontology research and that were presented by a researcher affiliated with an aquarium, with linear regression fitted.

(A) The number of abstracts that mention a species in each elasmobranch superorder as well as the subclass Holocephali. (B) Within abstracts mentioning the superorder Galeomorphii, the number of abstracts mentioning a species in each family. (C) Within abstracts mentioning the superorder Batoidea, the number of abstracts mentioning a species in each family.

The species (or groups of species indicated by an *) that were mentioned in more than 50 abstracts, and the research areas most commonly applied to each. Any research area n > 4 is indicated; all others are grouped together as “other.” See Supplemental Appendix 1 (see Data Accessibility) for a detailed description of each research area with examples.

The number of abstracts focusing on each species found in North American, Central American, and Caribbean waters that is listed as Threatened by IUCN Red List standards, from Kyne et al. (2012). An X indicates the Red List status of each species that has not been the focus of any abstracts. Red indicates Critically Endangered, Orange indicates Endangered, and Yellow indicates Vulnerable. The question mark by Caribbean electric ray reflects more recent published research suggesting that the species should instead be evaluated as “Least Concern,” but as of this writing it remains evaluated as “Critically Endangered” by the IUCN Red List database. Additionally, the abstracts presented about Caribbean electric rays were prior to a taxonomic shift.
Contributor Notes
Associate Editor: W. L. Smith.