Biodiversity material remains where capacity and governance are strong, but taxonomic resources concentrate with geopolitical power

Abstract

AimBiodiversity-rich regions often lack the scientific infrastructure needed to document and curate their own biodiversity, creating inequalities in access to taxonomic reference material. We investigated how biological, institutional, and geopolitical factors shape the retention, extraction, and appropriation of reptile holotypes, the name-bearing specimens upon which species descriptions are based. LocationGlobal. TaxonReptiles. MethodsWe compiled a historical dataset of reptile holotype origins and destinations spanning 1758-2024 to reconstruct long-term patterns of retention and international specimen flows. We then quantified species-level holotype retention, holotype flows between country pairs, and country-level patterns of retention, appropriation, and network centrality for the period 1990-2024, and used generalised linear mixed models to assess the biological, institutional, and geopolitical determinants of these contemporary circulation processes. ResultsAlthough nearly 90% of reptile species described originated in the Global South, less than a quarter of their holotypes remain housed there. Historically, exported holotypes consistently outnumbered retained holotypes on a decadal basis until the early twenty-first century. Retention was promoted by local scientific capacity, institutional infrastructure, collector involvement in species descriptions, and environmental governance. In contrast, extraction was concentrated in highly endemic regions with limited scientific infrastructure and was associated with taxonomic revisions, socioeconomic interest, and disparities in political stability and colonial history. Appropriation of foreign holotypes was greatest in countries with high research investment, strong environmental governance, and historical geopolitical influence. Main conclusionsGlobal patterns of holotype circulation reflect a persistent geography of scientific inequality. The distribution of taxonomic reference material emerges from the interaction of retention, extraction, and appropriation processes, linking local biodiversity discovery to uneven global scientific capacity. Reducing these inequalities will require investments in taxonomic expertise, institutional infrastructure, and governance frameworks that promote more equitable stewardship of biodiversity knowledge and its material foundations.