HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
Copeia 104, No. 2, 2016, 594–601
Evolution of the Role of Women in the American Society of Ichthyologists and
Herpetologists
Lynne R. Parenti1 and Marvalee H. Wake2,3
The role of women in the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists has evolved during the past 100 years.
In the early years of the Society, the role of women was largely limited to assisting men in research and administration.
One exceptional woman was Helen Thompson Gaige, a herpetologist at the University of Michigan, who served as
Editor-in-Chief of Copeia for most of the period from 1937 to 1950.Women have becomemore visible and engaged in all
aspects of the Society only during the past few decades. Of note, the first woman President, Marvalee Wake, was not
elected until 1982, and since then, just five more women, three herpetologists and two ichthyologists, have been
elected to that Society leadership position.We offer comments from our own experiences to show how our engagement
with the Society has influenced our careers.
W
OMEN have been a natural, integral part of the
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpe-
tologists (ASIH) since it was founded a century
ago. The women involved have had many roles during the
Society’s century of progress. Early in its existence, these
women usually were not members, but spouses or students
who contributed to and supported the work of the men, in
both research and in the Society. Their work for the Society
was mostly unsung and an almost expected consequence of
their association with men. Only in recent decades have the
roles of women evolved into those with greater responsibility
and greater visibility.
This is not a review of American women in ichthyology
and herpetology, but rather is intended to illustrate the
changing involvement of women in ASIH. Rosa Smith
Eigenmann (1858–1947) is often called the first woman
ichthyologist in the United States (Brown, 1994), but
published her last paper in 1891, more than two decades
before the first issue of Copeia, and, as far as we know, had
little to do with ASIH. Her husband, prominent ichthyologist
Carl Eigenmann, was not a Society officer. Other women
ichthyologists who lived and worked during the first 50 or so
years of the Society, such as Grace Pickford and Grace White,
also seem not to have been particularly involved (Brown,
1994), although women in comparable positions today in
universities and museums view participation in the Society as
routine. The situation was only slightly different for women
in herpetology—see below. One notable exception was
Margaret Hamilton Storey (1900–1960), curator and librarian
at Stanford University Natural History Museum, who
oversaw the museum’s ichthyology and herpetology collec-
tions (Brown, 1994). She also edited the Stanford Ichthyolog-
ical Bulletin and the Occasional Papers and in many other
ways encouraged and facilitated the research of Stanford’s
many notable faculty and graduate students in systematic
herpetology and ichthyology. Storey served as Secretary
(1937–1942) and President (1941) of the Western Division
of ASIH, which was chartered in 1929 and abolished in 1966
(Berra, 1984). We have two goals for this essay: first, to
present a brief review of the evolving role of women in the
several ‘‘parts’’ of ASIH, and second, to use our own
involvement as examples of that evolution.
Women and Copeia
A major venue for contributions and communication by
women in ASIH has long been the Society’s journal, Copeia.
Women (one in particular, Helen Beulah Thompson Gaige;
Fig. 1) have been involved in the publication process, either
via manuscripts or management, for much of the life of the
journal, and their participation mirrors most of the procedural
and leadership changes in the society. Copeia was started by
John T. Nichols (AMNH) in 1913 and published and circulated
initially at his own expense. Three years later, in February
1916, Nichols met with Henry W. Fowler (ANSP) and George
Dwight Franklin (AMNH) as a publication committee. These
‘‘founding fathers’’ realized the value of a formal society to
become the focus of communication; hence, the American
Society for the Study of Fishes and Reptiles emerged, and with
the development of bylaws a month later, became the
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists.
The early history of Copeia is summarized by Berra (1984)
and Mitchell and Smith (2013a, 2013b); we need not review
it, save to say that, as tabulated by Mitchell and Smith
(2013b), few women published in the journal in its early
days—only 21 contributed to the first series. Of 353 papers
on fishes, none was by a woman (Mitchell and Smith [2013b]
claim that one paper was written by a woman, Lynn Bogue
Hunt, but Hunt was a man). Appropriately, the first paper
published by a woman was in 1914 by University of
Michigan herpetologist Helen Gaige (who was to have a
major role subsequently in the development and mainte-
nance of Copeia). Several of the early female authors had
1 National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37012, NHB MRC 159, Washington, D.C. 20013-7012; Email:
parentil@si.edu.
2 Department of Integrative Biology and Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720-3140; Email:
mhwake@berkeley.edu.
3 Order of authorship is alphabetical.
 2016 by the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists DOI: 10.1643/OT-16-427 Published online: 5 July 2016
substantive careers in herpetology (e.g., Ruth Breder, Mary
Dickerson, Olive Stull, and Doris Mable Cochran [Fig. 2;
whose first publication in Copeia in 1939 dealt with a dog
that died from eating a Bufo {Incilius} alvarius]). Perhaps to
encourage more contributions by women ichthyologists, the
Marion Grey Award was established in 1965 for the best
ichthyological paper in Copeia written by a woman. Myvan-
wy Dick and Henry B. Bigelow donated $1,000 to fund the
award, which was never given for reasons unknown to us;
the funds were used to support the publication of selected
papers in Copeia, and not necessarily those by women.
After what Mitchell and Smith (2013b) termed the
‘‘academic coup,’’ when Editor Emmett Reid Dunn resigned
from the editorship of Copeia (after considerable criticism of
the journal by University of Michigan herpetologist and
administrator Alexander Ruthven, then-President of ASIH),
Ruthven established a corps of officers and editors largely at
Michigan. He appointed Carl Hubbs as ichthyological editor
and Helen Gaige as herpetological editor in 1930. In 1937,
ASIH had three life members: Thomas Barbour, Carl Hubbs,
and Helen Gaige. Gaige, who had been herpetological editor
for seven years, was appointed Editor-in-Chief of Copeia in
1937 and remained so until 1950 (except for the first post-
WWII year, 1946, when Reeve Bailey and Norman Hartweg
[Michigan] were co-editors). One of the first acts of Hubbs
and Gaige was to overhaul the format of Copeia and effect
numerous changes in publication policies, many of which
stand to this day. Helen Gaige’s strong leadership of the
journal for 20 years unquestionably facilitated the growth
and reputation of ASIH. She was elected Honorary President
in 1946 and remained so until her death in 1976 (founder J.
T. Nichols had been so elected 1927–1958, Leonhard
Fig. 1. Helen Thompson Gaige (1890–1976), herpetologist at the
University of Michigan and longtime Editor-in-Chief of Copeia. Portrait
by Le Clear photographic studio of Lansing, Michigan, 1913. Photo from
the UMMZ archives provided by Gregory Schneider.
Fig. 2. Doris Mable Cochran (1898–1968), herpetologist at the
National Museum of Natural History, ca. 1930s, at her desk with
ground-glass specimen jars from the collection. Photographer un-
known. Photo courtesy of the Smithsonian Institution Archives. Image
#92-957.
Historical perspectives 595
Stejneger 1931–1942, and Thomas Barbour 1944–1947; each
served until his death). Ms. Gaige was still listed as Honorary
President in 1982 in the Berra (1984) chronology; she was the
last, and perhaps the most respected for her contributions to
the Society. The category has been terminated. The Manag-
ing Editor of Copeia has otherwise always been a man, as were
the divisional and other editorships, until recently. For the
last two decades, women have been well represented in these
important service roles.
Another venue in which women have performed major
service, also associated with Copeia, is the office of Publica-
tions Secretary, created in 1949 and eliminated in 1997 (due
to changes of the constitution and bylaws and creation of
new committees). Initially held by men (Lionel Walford, N.
Bayard Green, Fred Berry, Les Knapp, and Hugh DeWitt),
Linda Trueb assumed the position in 1980. She reformed the
role and publications practices during her five-year tenure.
Women and ASIH governance
The ASIH Board of Governors (BOG) was not established
until 1940, a result of major changes in organization and the
bylaws. A 50-member Board was designated, each member
with a five-year term. Past-Presidents are ex officiomembers of
the Board for life. There was a hiatus in meetings during the
WWII years. In 1946, business resumed with a 30-member
board and elections/rotations subsequently. BOG minutes,
now reported extensively in Copeia, were sparse for a number
of years, and BOG membership and elections were rarely
reported.
Women did not have much of a voice in Society business
in the post-WWII decades. Few women were elected to the
BOG from 1946 to 1957; Grace Orton was elected in 1948
and 1954, Margaret Storey in 1949 and 1955, Frances Clark
in 1955, and Eugenie Clark in 1957. Otherwise, BOG was an
organization for men. That continued with increased
consistency with no women elected from 1958 through
1971. Marvalee Wake was elected in 1972, Margaret Stewart
in 1975, Judy Stamps in 1977, Martha Crump and Marvalee
Wake in 1979, Sharon Emerson and Cathy Toft in 1980,
Lynne Houck in 1983, and Susan Jewett (the first woman
ichthyologist since Eugenie Clark in 1957!) and Linda
Maxson in 1984. In the years that followed, none to five of
the ten members elected have been women (none in 1987,
1999, 2004, and 2009, but four in 1984 [Lynne Parenti, Fran
Irish, Meg Stewart, and Linda Trueb], and the high point of
five in 1994, with Miriam Benabib, Mo Donnelly, Susan
Jewett, Jackie Webb, and Fran Irish elected).
Given that the number of women in ichthyology and
herpetology in graduate school and in university and
museum positions increased dramatically from the mid-
1960s onward, we wonder what Nominating Committees
were thinking to act with such bias. One contributing factor
may well have been the reluctance of some Presidents to
appoint women to ASIH committees, such that a pipeline of
men, but few women, with experience was established upon
which Nominating Committees could draw. The Nominating
Committee itself was appointed by the ASIH President until
the bylaws were changed in 1975 and the committee elected
by the BOG. Almost at the same time, men, for obvious
reasons, dominated the nominations to Honorary Foreign
membership, then Ethelwynn Trewavas was elected in 1951,
Marie-Louise Bauchot in 1974, Alice Grandison in 1977,
Rosemary Lowe-McConnell in 1994, Eugenia del Pino in
1996, Gloria Arratia in 1999, and Natalia Ananjeva in 2010
(four ichthyologists and three herpetologists); of the 92
elected since the founding of the title in 1936, seven are
women, with four elected in 1996 and later (Hilton, 2016).
Numbers of women are increasing, both in the ‘‘pool’’ and in
the nominations, but not yet proportionally.
Likewise, there have been few women in major offices of
ASIH. It took nearly seven decades to elect the first woman
President—Marvalee Wake elected in 1982 to serve in 1984.
There have been just five more: Linda Trueb elected in 1990;
Margaret Stewart in 1994; Lynne Parenti in 2003 (the first
woman ichthyologist); Maureen Donnelly in 2015; and,
most recently, Carole Baldwin in 2016. The only female
Secretary is Maureen Donnelly (2000–2015) and the only
female Treasurer Margaret Neighbors (2001–2012), both so
recently. This list too reflects the interesting and curious
tendency for women herpetologists to be more extensively
represented than women ichthyologists in leadership roles in
the society.
We noted above that Helen Gaige was the last Honorary
President of ASIH, and one may ask why she never held the
office of President. We guess that she did not want the job. In
the joint obituary of Gaige and her husband, Michigan
entomologist Frederick McMahan Gaige, Joe Bailey
(1977:610) tells us, ‘‘I don’t know that Mrs. Gaige ever
attended a meeting of the ASIH except for those held in
Michigan and she managed to avoid the official pictures of
those.’’ Her contemporary, Doris Cochran, was elected a
Distinguished Fellow of ASIH in 1962, a position she held
until her death in 1968. Like the position of Honorary
President, that of Distinguished Fellow is being phased out.
Frances Clark, elected to the BOG in 1955, was the younger
sister of Laura Clark Hubbs, who was the wife of Carl Hubbs,
and the aunt of Frances Hubbs Miller, wife of Robert Rush
Miller. Laura and Frances attended ASIH meetings frequently
with their husbands, with whom they collaborated, and
provided guidance and support to numerous students and
professionals, but neither ever was a member of the BOG.
Participation of women in general ASIH activities
More recent Presidents (and some of the ‘‘earlier’’ ones)
have appointed more women to ASIH committees. We note
another interesting tendency—the appointments of women
were rare until recently (after 2000), and most have been to
the traditional spheres of award-dispensing and other
graduate-student-oriented committees and few as chairs.
Doris Cochran chaired the Resolutions Committee at the
1948 meeting and, more recently, Carol Johnston in 1992
and Lynne Parenti in 1996. It is only lately that we have had
balanced and proportional representation on such commit-
tees as the Nominating Committee and other purportedly
more ‘‘influential’’ ones, but we are delighted that the trend
has become established. This ‘‘new normal’’ cannot be
allowed to degenerate.
The pipeline and the experience that it affords really
matter, and we applaud the trend of funding of graduate
student research by ASIH. Since about 1996, women have
received about half of the Gaige awards in herpetology,
sometimes two thirds; Raney awards, although fewer each
year (but more lucrative) show a similar trend, yet for several
of the earlier years in the two decades just one or two women
received them. Given that merit is the essential criterion, it is
obvious that women are achieving and are being recognized
for their potential early in their careers. Both the achieve-
ments and the willingness to recognize potential will provide
596 Copeia 104, No. 2, 2016
necessary and appropriate encouragement to good students,
irrespective of gender.
The transition from few women involved in Society
activities to a fuller level of engagement got an unexpected
and uncomfortable boost at the annual meetings held in
Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, in 1992. During the regular
sessions, a man showed a sexist slide of a woman in his talk.
Women in wet t-shirts and other blatantly demeaning images
had appeared, from time to time, in talks at the meetings in
earlier decades, and regularly marred the pages of Dopeia, the
otherwise humorous, unofficial spoof of Copeia, but these
anachronistic displays were nearly forgotten. Women in
1992 were justifiably stunned by this unwelcome whiff of
nostalgia. Hand-written signs calling for an impromptu
meeting of women were posted in the women’s restrooms.
A resolution that condemned the action was written by the
Resolutions Committee, chaired by Carol Johnston, and
published in Copeia 1992(4):1184 as part of the meetings
summary (Burr, 1992).
Inevitably, women in the Society emerged from this
episode stronger and more self-assured. The next year, the
meetings in Austin featured a ‘‘Women in Science’’ lunch at
which Honorary Foreign Member and world-renowned fish
ecologist Rosemary Lowe-McConnell entertained the assem-
bled women with her wit and wisdom. In 1994, at the
meetings in Los Angeles, four women of ASIH—Sharon
Emerson, Margaret McFall-Ngai, Marvalee Wake, and Lynne
Parenti—discussed their lives and careers in an evening panel
discussion and social on ‘‘Women Scientists: Careers in the
90s.’’ Another positive outcome was the official formation of
the Equal Participation Committee in 1995. This committee
continued to organize a luncheon/panel discussion at the
annual meetings and encouraged an informal mentoring
program. At the 1997 Seattle meetings, the topic was
‘‘Maternity Leave and Child Care Issues.’’ These meetings
continued into the early 2000s until it was decided that such
discussions focused on women were no longer necessary
even though all the issues were not resolved. In 2011, Marlis
and Michael Douglas began a popular ‘‘speed-mentoring’’
program that brings together students and professionals,
women and men, at the annual meetings. In 2015, providing
child care at the annual meetings was taken up by the ASIH
Ad Hoc Committee on Membership chaired by Brian
Sidlauskas (it had been provided via local committees’ efforts
occasionally, but abandoned a decade or more ago because of
concerns about liability). Finally, mentoring and child care
are understood to be equally important to men and women.
PERSONAL HISTORIES
To complete this essay, we drew up a list of questions to serve
as a template for our personal stories which we each answer
in interview style. We aim to illustrate the changes we have
made in ourselves, especially in the context of ASIH.
Lynne R. Parenti
1. Why ichthyology?—I have always been interested in natural
history and science. Had I not become an ichthyologist, I
would probably be a botanist. My entry into systematic
ichthyology came out of what some might consider a
disappointment. I am a native New Yorker and for financial
reasons never considered a college outside the state. As a high
school senior in 1970–1971, I applied to Cornell University’s
liberal arts and sciences program and was accepted into the
freshman class. I had to decline because it was too expensive
for me and my family. Instead, I attended what was then
called the State University of New York at Stony Brook.
During my last two years there, I was a work/study student in
the lab of James S. Farris. Mary F. Mickevich was a graduate
student at the time and readily took to mentoring me. After I
completed a senior project on two sympatric species of the
killifish genus Fundulus, and was now obsessed with bones,
Mary suggested that if I was interested in comparative
anatomy and fish systematics, I should become a graduate
student of Donn Rosen at the American Museum of Natural
History (AMNH). I didn’t know who he was, but I soon found
out.
2. What early influences in your life helped you become an
ichthyologist?—A love of the natural world (I’d rather be
outside than inside and take daily walks at lunchtime) and a
deep appreciation for art and the relationship between art
and science. I come from a family of artists: my father worked
as a commercial artist, my oldest sister, Jane, is a quilter/
systems analyst and my middle sister, Diane, is a painter. My
mother’s sister made hats for the Stetson Co. Biology is the
most artistic of the sciences so I felt right at home with the
illustration and photography that is so integral to natural
history and systematics. I write for fun as well as research.
English teachers in high school and college (I took a course in
journalism because I wanted to be the next Jane Brody)
guided me toward clear prose.
3. Who were your mentors?—As above, Mary Mickevich was
one of the first. Donn Rosen shaped my way of thinking and
in many other ways was an incalculable influence; I am just
understanding some of that, even now. Early on, Jim Tyler
gave me guidance. Ethelwynn Trewavas and I shared an
office at the Natural History Museum, London, when I was a
postdoctoral fellow, and she tutored me in classical literature.
Maureen Hanscomb, a London writer, dancer, pianist, and
raconteuse taught me about music: jazz (Ella Fitzgerald) and
opera.
4. What obstacles did you face as your career developed? How
did you deal with them?—Some were internal; some were
external.
Internal: I was reluctant to publicly ‘‘come out’’ early on for
what I thought were good reasons that would be hard for
young people to understand today. I thought it was best to
keep quiet but that, of course, meant not to be authentic. It
couldn’t last and when I met Tina Ramoy, my life partner, in
San Francisco in 1986, I decided that authentic was better.
External: Where to begin? Most women of my generation
have a long list of injustices that we could rattle off. I will
mention just two. Some AMNH ichthyologists undertook
fieldwork in Guatemala when I was a graduate student, but I
never got to go. Women in the field were considered a
distraction. My graduate school colleague, Rich Vari, was
sympathetic and invited me on a fieldtrip to Suriname in
1980, for which I am most grateful (Fig. 3). The other is more
recent. In 2003 I was elected to the office of President of
ASIH. An ichthyologist asked me, ‘‘How did you pull that one
off?’’ I’m not kidding.
5. What are some highlights of your career?—Once I had gone
to Suriname, I realized how much I enjoyed tropical
fieldwork. As a postdoctoral fellow at the California Academy
of Sciences, I spent six weeks in Papua New Guinea in 1987
collecting fishes with Gerry Allen and Jack Randall. Jack
Historical perspectives 597
could not believe I had never been scuba diving, so I went
with him after minimal instruction. I survived and returned
to California excited about diving. Tina and I took a scuba
class and completed our certification dives in Monterey Bay
while seals nipped at the tips of our fins.
Fieldwork in Sulawesi in 1995 and 2010 fulfilled a long-
term dream. I have also been to Borneo three times, and
elsewhere throughout Asia and the central and western
Pacific (Fig. 4). Someday I may write a memoir about these
experiences.
As a NATO-NSF postdoctoral fellow I worked at the Natural
History Museum and lived in London for 16 months in the
early 1980s. I also traveled throughout Europe which gave
me an international perspective. In many ways, this period
changed my life.
It has been an honor to be an elected fellow of AAAS, the
California Academy of Sciences, and the Linnean Society of
London and an honorary member of the Masyarakat
Iktiologi Indonesia (Indonesian Society of Ichthyology). I
was thrilled when elected President of ASIH, and I prize my
Stoye and Gibbs awards from the Society. I value invitations
to speak or teach, especially from students, and accept as
many as I can. One other special honor was to be a
Distinguished Lecturer in the Artedi Symposium at the Royal
Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, in 2005.
My position as a Curator and Research Scientist at the
Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History is
extraordinary. I am a US federal employee which means my
job is different from many other academic appointments in
complex, yet positive, ways.
6. What advice would you give a young ichthyology or
herpetology student, female or male?—Be yourself. It is easy
and you do not have to practice. Listen to your mentors and
consider what they say. It matters little if you are turned
down for a particular graduate school or do not get a certain
job. What matters most is what you do next. Laugh often,
especially at yourself.
7. What, if anything, would you have done differently in your
career? Or did you meet all of your career goals?—I would
change little. As with the Cornell experience, above, I try to
learn from disappointments and explore other options. I
lived on grants and fellowships for some years following my
Ph.D., but when I got a job, it was among the best in
ichthyology. I never changed my goal to get a curatorial
position in a major natural history museum, which was
instilled in me as a graduate student of Donn Rosen at the
AMNH.
8. What are the favorite parts of your job as an ichthyologist?—
Fieldwork, obviously. Any work with specimens; I enjoy
sorting and identifying a field collection. Discovery of a new
character, species, or pattern of characters or of distribution.
Telling others about those discoveries through talks or
publications. Writing and editing. Composing illustrations
and drawing maps. Travel and the many colleagues and
friends I have worldwide. It has been a rich experience.
Mentoring students is great fun. Daniel Lumbantobing
came to Washington, D.C. from Indonesia to get his Ph.D. at
the George Washington University with me and GWU
professor John Burns. Daniel loves to write English almost
as much as I do. We met one afternoon to discuss the
difference among the words ‘‘margin,’’ ‘‘rim,’’ and ‘‘edge’’ to
describe an anatomical feature.
9. What are the worst parts?—To have to decide what not to
do. The opportunities are vast and there is no time to do it
all.
10. What has been the influence of ASIH on your career?—ASIH
is my principal scientific society. I joined soon after entering
graduate school in 1975 and became a Life Member after that
category was re-instituted in the early 1990s. I attended my
Fig. 3. Lynne Parenti on the Corantijn River, Suriname, September
1980 (photo by R. P. Vari).
Fig. 4. Lynne Parenti on Coconut Island, Oahu, Hawaii, April 2013
(photo by Zeehan Jaafar).
598 Copeia 104, No. 2, 2016
first meeting in Gainesville, Florida, in 1977 and every one
since. I grew up in the society. I sharpened my skills as a
‘‘ham’’ as emcee of the annual banquet. Early on, I formed
the goal to become ASIH President. The 2016 meeting will be
my 40th in a row. This is an obsession. Why? Because ASIH is
the preeminent society for systematic ichthyology. I have
presented all of my major research results, ideas, and
questions on fishes at ASIH meetings. There is really nowhere
else to go and be readily understood. If it didn’t exist, we
would have to invent it.
Marvalee H. Wake
1. Why herpetology?—Completely by accident. As a senior in
college, long planning a career in medicine, I had delayed
most of my Zoology major requirements until my last year.
I’d applied to med schools and was shadowing physicians.
But I was becoming disenchanted with medicine because I
saw so many physicians largely being technicians, without
judgment or empathy. At the same time, I was finding my
zoology courses (evolution, physiology, embryology, verte-
brate natural history, etc.) fascinating. Shortly after the
evolution course started, the professor (Jay Savage) called
me in and told me I ought to be doing a senior research
project. I wandered over to his office to find out what he
meant (and past the offices of Arnold Kluge, David Wake,
Tony Gaudin, and others of Jay’s graduate students). Jay had
just returned from a Guggenheim year in the field in Costa
Rica and had a set of amphibians (caecilians, of course) that
he hadn’t yet identified. That became my senior thesis—
identifying the caecilians and doing as much background
reading on their biology as possible. Jay suggested that I
apply to graduate school at USC, even though deadlines had
passed. Because I was turned off by what I was seeing of day-
to-day medicine, and excited about research potential in
biology, I decided to apply. The rest is ‘‘history’’—I’ve
essentially continued my senior thesis research for the rest
of my life.
2. What early influences in your life helped you become a
herpetologist?—My parents encouraged all sorts of explora-
tion, largely through libraries, but also in discussions of most
topics (aspects of politics and social structure were verboten).
They let me think I could do almost anything, as long as I
worked hard and kept my perspective. In fourth grade, I had
a wonderful teacher whose main interest was field biology.
We were in and out of tide pools, chaparral, etc. I thought she
was ancient, but she was spry and wonderfully knowledge-
able. I thought I might be able to be like that. . .
3. Who were your mentors?—My primary mentor was Jay
Savage. It was an unusual situation, though—I was Jay’s first
female student (some dynamite women followed), he was
away much of the time, and I left USC after my first two years
of graduate work to go with my then-new husband to
Chicago, with the intention of doing my qualifying exam at
USC but nearly all of my dissertation research in Chicago for
the USC degree. So I saw rather little of Jay, but he was always
helpful when asked. It was not a good time in the sense that
there were few women on science faculties in the early 1960s.
Olga Hartman, the amazing invertebrate zoologist, had a staff
research position at USC. Only one woman, Ruth Bass, was a
biology faculty member, a Professor of Biochemistry. I still
remember my shock when one of her distinguished col-
leagues introduced her, saying, ‘‘Ruthie isn’t a woman, she’s a
biochemist!’’ While teaching in the brand new University of
Illinois–Chicago Circle’s Department of Biology, I did most of
my research at the University of Chicago and some at the
Field Museum of Natural History. Robert Inger was always
helpful and ready to talk about science. David Wake
facilitated much of my research in his new lab at the
University of Chicago, was ever-encouraging, and has always
been my rock. His wonderful histology technician, Addye
Brown, was one of my most important mentors! I learned
technique from her. . . Because of my experiences, and
relative ‘‘distance’’ from the people who had early influence,
I tend to define ‘‘mentorship’’ as significant encouragement
and advice, but not necessarily provided by one individual. I
think that a young scientist should keep an open mind, seek
advice broadly, and assimilate those features that work for
the extant situation. One shoe doesn’t fit all, and one mentor
is not necessarily the ideal to follow assiduously. . .
4. What obstacles did you face as your career developed? How
did you deal with them?—The obstacles were many and
varied; I am pleased to say that things have changed a lot,
and I know a number of younger women scientists who
acknowledge that being female has not only not held them
back, but probably helped them to be recruited. I have the
usual litany of difficulties, such as overhearing the conver-
sation of my labmates when they learned I was pregnant and
their ‘‘Well, she’ll never finish’’ (I finished before all of
them. . .), not being allowed to go on some field trips, the
assumption that I work for my husband (this still persists in
some quarters), the more damaging assumptions either that I
can’t think independently of my husband (I think I’ve
demonstrated that’s not accurate), or that we are competitors
(hardly). Was having accepted various ‘‘helping’’ roles a
mistake? Not at all; I learned so much about how institutions
work and people behave. . . I once thought of doing an
‘‘alternative cv’’ of my ‘‘first woman’’ roles and titles, but I
decided that would be foolish, because I’ve spent my career
trying to make things better for women, all students, and
science itself, so a listing of points of change is neither
important nor useful. It’s all about interest and stimulation,
and PERSISTENCE.
5. What are some highlights of your career?—I’ve had many
‘‘highlights,’’ ranging from teaching splendid students,
graduate and undergraduate, to working with societies and
an NGO. I have had the honor to be elected President of
several societies (e.g., ASIH, AIBS, SICB, ISVM), congresses
(WCH, ICVM), and an international NGO (IUBS). Each has
carried significant but interesting responsibilities. Besides, it’s
fun—one interacts with a great diversity of interesting people
and learns a lot about how institutions function. IUBS (the
International Union of Biological Sciences) for me involved
an early emphasis on biodiversity science (including being
one of the co-founders of the DIVERSITAS international
biodiversity science NGO), introducing a decadal program in
‘‘Integrative Biology’’ for development by the Union, and a
lot of interesting global travel to represent IUBS. I have been
deeply honored to be elected a Fellow of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, the American
Academy of Arts and Sciences, the California Academy of
Sciences, and the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, and
the Linnean Society of London, and to receive the CAS
Fellows’ Medal and the ASIH Henry Fitch Award. My research
has often been rewarding; new discoveries have provided
new avenues. I have been enormously privileged!
Historical perspectives 599
6. What advice would you give a young herpetology student,
female or male?—Keep an open, questioning mind, do not be
trapped by complacency, and explore widely and try new
ideas, techniques, places, and interests. Never be defeated;
just step back and take stock. Try to have ‘‘whole’’ lives—
interests in family, and those activities that bring a different
peace and happiness. Do music, hiking, or whatever that
helps to keep a little more sanity, despite all those factors that
we label ‘‘pressure.’’
7. What, if anything would you have done differently in your
career? Or did you meet all of your career goals?—I would have
been born 50 years later (not that I had a choice)! New
techniques that have emerged in the last 10–20 years have
revolutionized evolutionary morphology and development,
and I need another lifetime! I’ve tried to be adaptable and
sought situations that were stimulating and in which I could
be useful. Most had vicissitudes of various sorts, but I’d rather
be out on a limb than waiting for things to happen. . . In
retrospect, I would have done three things differently: 1)
chosen a different focal taxon (it’s been VERY frustrating to
have an idea and not be able to get the material to deal with
it), 2) been more centrally focused but still integrative and
bridging levels of the biological hierarchy, and 3) not
postponed ‘‘fun’’ things...forever. I certainly haven’t met all
of my career goals, but those goals kept changing as science
advanced and my own roles changed.
8. What are the favorite parts of your job as a herpetologist?—
Being able to work in the field (Figs. 5, 6), the lab, and
collections; working with great students and postdocs;
working with the public to aid in understanding biology
and science broadly; and interacting with interesting people
in interesting places.
9. What are the worst parts?—The frustration of inadequate
sample sizes and data, the occasional difficulty managing
research, teaching, service, funding, and family, and espe-
cially finding quality time for all I want to do, especially with
David, son Tom, and now with our wonderful granddaughter
Summer and her mom, Chrissy. I still haven’t learned how to
say ‘‘no,’’ which poses its own problems. . .
10. What has been the influence of ASIH on your career?—ASIH
has had a strong influence on me in terms of aspects of my
research and of my approach to colleagues and students. It
was the first professional society that I joined as a graduate
student, so I ‘‘grew up’’ in that context. I quickly found that
some people were not supportive, but that most were; it also
became apparent that professional societies could have a
great deal to say about research and careers. I appreciate
many people’s passion for ‘‘their’’ animals, and for the
research they do and especially the field component of it. It is
a society that has been somewhat receptive (over time) to
change, more so in terms of research and less so regarding its
own sociology, but that too is changing. It has given me a
perspective on what societies can do for the profession and
for science.
CONCLUSION
We hope that we have entertained and enlightened you
with this brief history and our perspectives on our careers.
Although different, they share some common themes,
perhaps the most important of which is that we did not
follow a straight path from child to professional scientist.
Our lives have brought us twists and turns that we could
never have predicted. Many others, women and men, have
had careers with all sorts of similar variations; it would be
of great interest to develop personal historical records of
the diverse ways that one can participate in professional
societies, especially ASIH. The oral histories and the
individual histories published in Copeia fill part of that
need, but an invitation to our colleagues at all education
and career stages to write brief, personal accounts in their
unique voices could lead us into the next 100 years of
ASIH.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the members of the ASIH Centennial Committee
for inviting us to write this essay. Marty Crump, Eric Hilton,
Joe Mitchell, and Dave Smith read and commented on a draft
of the manuscript. Greg Schneider, University of Michigan
Museum of Zoology, graciously provided the photo of Helen
Fig. 5. Marvalee Wake collecting (probably salamanders) in the cloud
forest near San Marcos, Guatemala, August 2006 (photo by D. B. Wake).
Fig. 6. Marvalee Wake preparing caecilians in San Marcos, Guatemala,
August 2006 (photo by D. B. Wake).
600 Copeia 104, No. 2, 2016
Gaige, and Heidi Stover of the Smithsonian Institution
Archives provided the photo of Doris Cochran.
LITERATURE CITED
Bailey, J. R. 1977. Helen Thompson Gaige and Frederick
McMahon Gaige 1890–1976. Copeia 1977:609–611.
Berra, T. M. 1984. A chronology of the American Society of
Ichthyologists and Herpetologists through 1982. Special
Publication 2, American Society of Ichthyologists and
Herpetologists.
Brown, P. S. 1994. Early women ichthyologists. Environ-
mental Biology of Fishes 41:9–30.
Burr, B. 1992. Summary of the meetings 1992. Copeia 1992:
1154–1197.
Hilton, E. J. 2016. Honorary Foreign Members of the
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists.
Copeia 104:286–292.
Mitchell, J. M., and D. G. Smith. 2013a. Copeia 1913,
Number 1: origin and authors. Copeia 2013:189–193.
Mitchell, J. M., and D. G. Smith. 2013b. The history of
Copeia: metamorphosis and the academic coup. Copeia
2013:361–365.
Historical perspectives 601