Add annual pc OA acts, fix section concat

01-summary.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 We review access to literature and type specimens, key resources for taxonomic research. Takeup of Open Access (OA) publishing in plant naming is analysed using the International Plant Names Index (IPNI) published between $year_min$ and $year_max$, and online availability of specimens analysed using the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). Integration of the World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP) taxonomy and  distributional data (recorded using the World Geographic Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions, WGSRPD to level 3) is use to examine regional variation.
 
-$nomenclatural_act_open_pc$% of vascular plant names are published OA, and $nomenclatural_act_undiscoverable_pc$ are digitally undiscoverable, as they are contained in bibliographic works without a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) or with a DOI that does not resolve. The most common OA publishing model used is "gold". 31% of taxa are represented by a digitised type specimen mobilised from within the continent (WGSRPD level 1) of their natural range. 
+$nomenclatural_act_open_pc$% of vascular plant names are published OA, and $nomenclatural_act_undiscoverable_pc$% are digitally undiscoverable, as they are contained in bibliographic works without a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) or with a DOI that does not resolve. The most common OA publishing model used is "gold". 31% of taxa are represented by a digitised type specimen mobilised from within the continent (WGSRPD level 1) of their natural range. 
 
 We recommend clear article processing charge (APC) waivers for authors from low and middle income countries to better enable "gold" OA, and promotion of deposition repositories to better enable "green" OA. Nomenclators should clearly indicate the OA status of bibliographic references, and mobilise type citation data as material citations to aggregators like GBIF. Names registration systems should promote the capture of code-recommended elements such as catalogue numbers for type specimens. Digital mobilisation of specimen metadata and images from collections based in low and middle income countries must be accelerated to help increase in country taxonomic capacity to document and conserve plant diversity.
 

06-results.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # Results
 
 Our dataset extracted from IPNI comprised $nomenclatural_act_count$ nomenclatural act records published in $publications_total$ different publications between $year_min$ and $year_max$. $dois_from_ipni$ of these had DOIs recorded in IPNI, $dois_from_col$ were backfilled with DOIs recorded in the Catalogue of Life. We found that each year, the IPNI dataset include acts published in an average of $publications_annual_mean$ different publications (n=$number_of_years$). $nomenclatural_act_proportion_in_serial$% of names are published in serials. The spike in numbers of nomenclatural acts published for 2018 was caused by the large volume of combinations ($nomenclatural_act_glovap_count$) published in GLOVAP [@christenhusz2018global]. 
-Each year, less than one third of nomenclatural acts are published open access. We did not observe a trend towards open access throughout the time period analysed (figure  @fig:fig2 (a)). When looking at the kinds of open access used (figure  @fig:fig2 (b)), we find that *gold* dominates. Here we do find a difference through time, with *green* (self-archiving) showing a slightly greater representation in the earlier years in the study.
+On average each year, less than one quarter ($oa_annual_pc_avg$%) of nomenclatural acts are published open access. We did not observe a trend towards open access throughout the time period analysed (figure  @fig:fig2 (a)). When looking at the kinds of open access used (figure  @fig:fig2 (b)), we find that *gold* dominates. Here we do find a small difference through time, with *green* (self-archiving) showing a slightly greater representation in the earlier years in the study.
 When analysing the data by publication, we find that many journals active in the publication of nomenclatural acts are undiscoverable - the containing bibliographic work is not labelled with a DOI. (figure  @fig:fig3 - or the acts are labelled with a DOI which is now unresolvable ($dois_unresolvable$ in total, in $publications_w_unresolvable_dois$ different publications).
 
 ![Open access takeup and status](ipni-oa-composite.png){#fig:fig2}

Makefile

@@ -125,18 +125,6 @@ article_parts=00-preamble.yaml \
 			data/section-separator.md \
 			data/taxa2nativerangetypeavailability.md \
 			data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/type-availability-header-cbd.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/taxa2gbiftypeavailability-cbd.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/taxa2nativerangetypeavailability-cbd.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/type-availability-header-nagoya.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/taxa2gbiftypeavailability-nagoya.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
-			# data/taxa2nativerangetypeavailability-nagoya.md \
-			# data/section-separator.md \
 			07-discussion.md \
 			data/section-separator.md \
 			08-acknowledgements.md \