Authors, signatories & authorship policy

How to take part

This is a Scientists’ Warning — it carries weight both through the scientists who write it and the much larger community who endorse it. We welcome people who want to contribute datasets, review papers, or edit text.

Requirements for each role

Lead & corresponding author — Moi Expósito-Alonso. Ensures coordination across the group; architects the article; makes authorship decisions and identifies non-compliance; secures funding for data storage, scripting, software, and publication; writes, supervises, and publishes; devises the Delphi surveys and gathers feedback; organizes the Delphi responses; and curates and displays the data.

Lead section authors. Organize the team of experts for their section; create figures and concept graphics; deliver paragraphs and sections on time; identify relevant literature and knowledge gaps; brainstorm interpretation of the Delphi responses; and help identify authorship non-compliance.

Section authors. Critically evaluate the data; contribute the data requested for their section; complete the paper reviews assigned to them; and read and approve the final product.

The Delphi consensus

The warning is built on a formal Delphi consensus process — iterative, anonymous expert questionnaires that converge on a shared statement.

• All authors are required to submit responses to the Delphi questionnaires for all sections.
• The Delphi is open beyond the author team: any scientist or member of the public may submit answers. We gather basic context (institution, role, country), but responses are only ever displayed in aggregate — individual answers are never attributed. This anonymity is what keeps the consensus honest: seniority and reputation can’t steer the result.
• The public can contribute answers, but does not sign. Signing the warning is reserved for scientists (below). Where public participation is high enough, we may show public perception alongside scientist perception in the consensus figures — so the broader community’s input is credited collectively, even though it is not part of the scientists’ endorsement.
• Delphi contributors are not required to sign the final paper as signatories.

Signatories

Endorsing is open to any practicing or trained scientist who agrees with the paper’s core message. It is a light commitment — you are lending your name to the consensus, not taking on authorship duties.

• Any member of the scientific community will be able to read the final paper and sign it; an institutional email is required as proof.
• Signatories are listed as endorsers — not as authors — and form the broad scientific consensus behind the statement.
• Signing opens when the final paper is released.

Authorship credit (CRediT)

All authors will be credited with CRediT roles (Contributor Roles Taxonomy), so each contribution is credited with specificity rather than collapsed into a generic “author” role. For the full set of roles and example tasks, see Hosseini et al. (2026), CRediT Roles and Example Research Tasks That Could be Attributed to Them (Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.18421449).

Conflicts of interest

Co-authors must declare any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest relevant to the paper’s recommendations (e.g., advisory roles at seed companies, conservation NGOs, or government agencies with policy stakes in the paper’s recommendations). Declarations are collected at sign-up and reaffirmed before submission.

Diversity & inclusion

We actively seek contributors and signatories across career stages, institutions, geographies, and disciplinary backgrounds. Scientists from regions and communities most affected by genetic diversity loss are especially encouraged to take part. Participation is light: it costs a bit of volunteered time — mainly reviewing the relevant section(s) and weighing in on the Delphi consensus rounds.

Current authors & signatories

The author list and signatory list will be published here at submission.