Search for: All records

Summary Biodiversity knowledge gaps and biases persist across low-income tropical regions. Genetic data are essential for addressing these issues, supporting biodiversity research and conservation planning. To assess progress in wildlife genetic sampling within the Philippines, I evaluated the scope, representativeness, and growth of publicly available genetic data and research on endemic vertebrates from the 1990s through 2024. Results showed that 82.3% of the Philippines’ 769 endemic vertebrates have genetic data, although major disparities remain. Reptiles had the least complete coverage but exhibited the highest growth, with birds, mammals, and amphibians following in that order. Species confined to smaller biogeographic subregions, with narrow geographic ranges, or classified as threatened or lacking threat assessments were disproportionately underrepresented. Research output on reptiles increased markedly, while amphibian research lagged behind. Although the number of non-unique authors in wildlife genetics studies involving Philippine specimens has grown steeply, Filipino involvement remains low. These results highlight the uneven and non-random distribution of wildlife genetic knowledge within this global biodiversity hotspot. Moreover, the limited participation of Global South researchers underscores broader inequities in wildlife genomics. Closing these gaps and addressing biases creates a more equitable and representative genetic knowledge base and supports its integration into national conservation efforts aligned with global biodiversity commitments. 

A first review of the history, status, and prospects for Philippine herpetology conducted more than two decades ago (2002) summarized the diverse topics studied and highlighted the development and achievements in research up to the year 2000. This study revisits and re-assesses what Philippine herpetology has accomplished, both as a discipline and a community, during the last two decades (2002–2022). A total of 423 herpetological publications was collated, revealing a substantial increase in annual publications, rising from approximately four per year during 2002–2008 to around 28 per year in 2009–2022. Half of the published studies focused on squamate reptiles (lizards 30.5%, snakes 21%) and 28.4% on amphibians, 5.9% on turtles, and 2.6% on crocodiles. The remaining 11.6% of studies focused simultaneously on multiple taxa (i.e., faunal inventories). Diversity and distribution (35.2%) and ecological (26.5%) studies remained popular, while studies on taxonomy (14.9%), phylogenetics and biogeography (11.8%), and conservation (11.6%) all increased. However, geographical gaps persist urging immediate surveys in many understudied regions of the country. Finally, we found a balanced representation between Filipino and foreign first authors (1.0:1.1), yet a substantial gender gap exists between male and female first authors (7.1:1.0). Nonetheless, the steep increase in publications and the diversity of people engaged in Philippine herpetology is a remarkable positive finding compared to the 20 years preceding the last review (1980–2000). Our hope is that the next decades will bring increasingly equitable, internationally collaborative, and broadly inclusive engagement in the study of amphibians and reptiles in the Philippines.