Scientists compiled a list of 331 Australian land-based mammal species, which they categorized as the “good,” the “bad,” and the “ugly” based on their estimates of public and scientific perceptions. As you’d expect, the “good” ones were koalas, kangaroos, and their relatives. “Bad” animals were introduced and invasive species like rabbits and foxes, and “ugly” animals were native rodents and bats like the adorable specimen pictured above (hey, ugly is subjective).
The researchers then searched the academic literature from 1900 to the present day, looking for papers on any of the 311 species. They analyzed the resulting pile of 14,248 papers to determine which species had been studied and how often.
A clear imbalance emerged. Studies on the “good” animals focused mainly on their anatomy and physiology, while those on the “bad” animals were more interested in eradication and population control. The “ugly” animals were more or less ignored: despite making up more than 45 percent of the species list, bats and rodents only appeared in 1587 of the more than 14,000 papers.
via Mental Floss
