Search

The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology (SICB) should, in theory, be a home for scientists working across the entire Tree of Life. In practice, SICB has remained principally a society that supports integrative zoological research. Here we highlight a broad collection of what we consider to the best in integrative and comparative plant biology, gathered together for a special symposium at the 2019 SICB meeting. This symposium and special issue mark the initiation of a new Division of Botany within SICB, which we hope will usher in a new era of SICB where botanists and zoologists engage, collaborate, and celebrate together in this especially creative period of integrative and comparative biology.

Due to the politicization of science and the proliferation of misinformation about science and its significance, it has never been more crucial for scientists to clearly articulate the importance of science to the public. Despite this, many scientists often (1) do not acknowledge the importance of broader scientific communication; (2) are not familiar with tools or resources that can improve their communication of science, both among colleagues and to the general public; and (3) do not receive such training through their degree or job training programs. In this symposium, scientists who work across multiple disciplines in entertainment, communication, and narrative are brought together with entertainment and communication industry professionals practiced in interpreting and presenting complex data in thoughtful and cogent ways. Together, they offer lessons learned and provide engagement strategies for integrative and comparative biology and for science in general.

We are particularly pleased that Alcohol and Alcoholism has dedicated this special collection to ‘Sex and Gender differences in Alcohol Use Disorder’. To date, a series of preclinical and clinical studies have tried to shed light on the similarities and differences in the field of alcohol research between men and women (Agabio et al., 2016a and 2017; Salvatore et al., 2017; McHugh et al., 2018; Ait-Daoud et al., 2019; Becker and Chartoff, 2019). However, our understanding of the complexities on this topic remains limited.

Medicine of the early 21st century has been characterized by the examination of disparities in sex, gender, and minority health. The institutionalized tradition has been to define health in a male-centric, male-dominant focus. As highlighted by one of the articles in this issue, it was only in 2016 (1) that the NIH mandated that sex be recognized as a biological variable in grant submissions. The erroneous tradition of disease research has been that human, animal, and cellular distinctions between male and female sex were irrelevant. In the context of advancements in the recognition of male and female sex and gender differences, why is there a need for a special edition focused on men's health? Jason Y. Park Madeline B. Deutsch In this special edition, we have attempted to examine men's health not as a monolithic topic, but rather an examination of health related to anatomy, gender, nationality, and various cultural practices. The term “men's health” used in association with this special edition includes the …