The feature of papers and citation analysis of eleven journals in tropical medicine indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded

To determine the features of papers, authors, and citation of eleven journals in tropical medicine indexed by Science Citation Index Expanded, the database of the Institute for Scientific Information, we analyzed original articles, editorials, reviews, corrections, letters, biographies, and news published in these journals. The results show that these journals covered 107 countries or regions on six continents. The average number of reference was 23.05, with 87.89% of the references from periodicals. The Price Index was 31.43% and the self-citing rate was 7.02%. The references in the first 20 journals ranked by the amount of citation accounted for 36.71% of the total citations. Brazil, United States, India, and England are more advanced in tropical medicine research. The conclusion is that these journals covered most research done in these countries or regions. Most researches were done by cooperation of the researchers, but many of the publications used outdated articles and should include newer information.     

Who does all the research in conservation biology?

Much of the worlds biodiversity is located within countries with developing economies. We therefore examine how well developing nations and their scientists are represented in three international conservation biology journals (Conservation Biology, Biological Conservation, Biodiversity and Conservation). We found: (1) that 28% of studies were from lower income countries and only 15% of all papers had primary authors from these nations. Of papers from lower income countries, although 80% had at least one local author, only 47% had primary authors from the country where the study was conducted. (2) Lower income countries had more research with a strong applied focus compared to research from high-income countries. (3) In lower income countries research was often funded by international sources but the primary authors of these studies were from affluent nations. (4) The three journals differed in how well they represented lower income nations and their scientists, reflecting their editorial policies for including research from lower income nations. The main reason for the large discrepancy in a countrys output of conservation research is due to the difference in a nations ability to invest in science. However, a brief survey of authors suggests that there is a large amount of information available in lower income and non-English speaking countries that is not easily accessible to the international conservation community. Journals may therefore need to consider altering their policies if we are to improve the representation of research by scientists in lower income nations.     

The increasing divide between First and Third Worlds: science, collaboration and conservation of Third World aquatic ecosystems

1. Ten of the leading journals in the field of freshwater ecology were identified using the Science Citation Index’s Journal Citation Reports. These journals were surveyed to assess the levels and patterns of collaboration in research initiatives in regions of the Third World. Membership demographics of five professional societies in this field were also examined to elucidate distribution patterns of practitioners in the field. 2. In total, 8960 papers were surveyed, of which only forty were published in a language other than English. Senior authors came from 114 of the 130 different countries listed among authors’ addresses. Of these, forty-five were from Third World countries and sixty-nine from the First World. Five countries were responsible for 60.64% of the papers submitted; the United States = 25.65%; Canada = 11.55%; Australia = 10.15%; the United Kingdom = 6.73%; New Zealand = 6.56%. Multi-authored papers accounted for 73.05% of all papers. 3. Papers by authors from Third World countries accounted for only 10.93% of single-author papers and less than 10% of multi-authored papers. Collaboration was found in 73.05% of the papers surveyed, the vast majority of which (87.39%) was between authors from First World countries. Only 825 (9.21%) of the papers surveyed involved authors from different countries. Most of this collaboration (72.36%) was between authors from different First World countries. 4. Some 1038 papers surveyed included research undertaken in, or included authors from, Third World countries. The majority of these papers (69.08%) were submitted by authors from Third World countries, involving either multiple or single authorship. The third most common publication relating to research in Third World regions (17.4%) came from single-author papers in which the authors were from a First World country. Only four of the papers surveyed were submitted by single authors from Third World countries working in First World countries. 5. There is a disproportionate representation of taxonomic (20.3%) and marine (10.5%) papers from the Third World regions in comparison to both lentic (8.0%) and lotic (7.4%) papers. 6. Membership demographics of the professional societies surveyed continue to reflect the historical origins of freshwater ecology. More than 80% of members in the three largest societies examined are registered in Europe and North America, while membership of the remaining societies remains largely regional. 7. It is argued that present levels of collaboration and technology transfer from the First World to the Third World are inadequate and that, given the widening gulf in terms of personnel and resources, the future of essential research on inland waters in the Third World does not bode well unless in situ capacity building within Third World countries becomes a target of First World research and funding agencies.     

Arboreal tropical forest vertebrates: current knowledge and research trends

We review the ecology and specialized methods required for studying arboreal mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, and use faunal checklists from 12 tropical wet forest sites and an analysis of all articles published during the past ten years in 14 major journals to assess current knowledge and general research trends for these groups. The percentage of arboreal vertebrates was remarkably similar at the different sites (76.2 ± 3.9%). Birds were the most arboreal group and amphibians and reptiles the least. The review of journals showed that primates were overwhelmingly the most studied group (336 papers), followed by bats (105), passeriform birds (73) and rodents (55). Judging by their portion of the arboreal vertebrate community and the number of papers surveyed, birds and amphibians and reptiles are vastly understudied compared to mammals, but this is largely due to the great number of primate studies. The number of publications on arboreal vertebrates has remained relatively stable over the last 10 years for all taxa except primates, which have seen a growth in publications. Canopy vertebrates from Brazil had by far the most publications (120), followed by Madagascar (61), Costa Rica (55) and Indonesia (42). We conclude by highlighting the priorities we see for future studies on tropical canopy vertebrates.     

从文献计量角度分析中国生物多样性研究现状

以汤森路透科技集团的WEB OF KNOWLEDGE信息平台提供的Science Citation Index Expanded数据库为数据源,检索到从1997年至2009年期间国际生物多样性研究论文文献219773篇,其中11182篇来自于中国学者。利用NoteExpress软件,对这13a间生物多样性研究论文发表的国家分布、年度分布、研究机构、引用情况、期刊分布和学科分类等做的分析与比较表明:1)全球生物多样性研究的论文数量一直呈增长趋势,中国13年间每年发文量占当年全球生物多样性论文总量的百分率逐年增加;2)从论文总被引频次、篇均引用次数和h-index三项论文影响力特征参数分析,中国与国际其他国家相比有一定差距;3)从学科分类来看,与国际相比,中国在生物多样性保护领域、进化生物学和海洋与淡水生物学领域研究略显不足,昆虫学和真菌学研究领域活跃。     

继往开来,积极推动中国生物多样性科学发展——《生物多样性》创刊二十年回顾

《生物多样性》自1993年由中国科学院生物多样性委员会创办以来,一直秉承首任主编钱迎倩先生确定的刊物定位:紧跟国际热点和趋势,反映中国生物多样性科学研究进展;及时报道保护、管理和持续利用生物多样性的经验,包括法律法规和国际履约。时逢《生物多样性》创办20周年,我们总结了刊物的发展历程,分析了创刊以来策划的研究热点、报道对象、作者队伍及产生的影响,以期更好为推动中国生物多样性科学发展服务。这些年,生物多样性科学领域的热点问题,如生物入侵、全球变化下的生物多样性、DNA条形码、生物多样性监测与变化机制、谱系多样性、生物多样性信息学等,以及《生物多样性公约》及其履行进展在本刊上都得到了及时报道,2000年以后出版的13个专刊(专栏)更是热点问题的集中体现。在发表的1,189篇(不包括增刊)文章中物种多样性方面文章最多,遗传多样性方面的文章次之;从研究类群上看,植物和动物方面的文章明显多于微生物方面的文章。研究对象的地理分布则与所属地区的多样性丰富程度或受关注程度有一定的相关性。刊物目前已形成较为稳定的作者群,发表文章最多的前10位作者分别来自中国科学院(6人)、北京大学(2人)和复旦大学(2人);文章的平均作者数从1993年的约1.5人/篇增加到2011年的约4人/篇,一定程度上反映了团队合作的态势;每篇文章的平均页码数也从创刊时的平均5页左右逐渐增加到目前的10页左右,文章的信息量大大增加。发表的论文主要受国家自然科学基金、科技部项目和中国科学院项目资助,表明作者群的层次是比较高的。发表的论文中被引次数大于40的文章超过200篇,最高达970次(中国知网,2012年8月10日检索);被SCI刊物的引用次数也呈逐年递增趋势。《生物多样性》是目前我国发表生物多样性研究成果最多、影响最大、生物多样性科学领域最重要的刊物。但毋庸讳言,《生物多样性》如国内其他中文科技期刊一样,正面临巨大挑战,如优秀稿源匮乏、刊物国际化和国内评价体系的压力、如何协调基础性和应用性、如何兼顾作者和读者的需求等。针对上述问题,我们提出了对策建议,指出《生物多样性》在"立足本土的国际化"和前沿创新与基础支撑兼顾的定位下,继续提高学术质量,并通过数字化平台和新闻媒体宣传发表的重要成果等方式,提高科技信息传播效率,扎实推动中国生物多样性科学的发展。     

基于近10年红球菌发展的文献计量分析

【背景】近些年,越来越多的研究集中在红球菌上,很少有研究人员对现有文献进行全面回顾。【目的】为了探究国内外红球菌领域的研究热点、前沿和未来发展趋势,以便为后续研究人员提供全面直观的参考。【方法】对近10年发表在Web of Science的红球菌领域论文进行统计分析和文献计量分析。通过VOSviewer文献可视化软件绘制作者标签视图和关键词共现网络图。【结果】全球有关红球菌领域的发文量总体呈逐年上升趋势,发表期刊多为微生物学领域的专科期刊,中国和美国的文章发表数和引用数远超其他国家,红球菌的研究内容也主要集中在生物催化、生物降解和非核糖体肽合成酶等方面。【结论】红球菌在世界范围内越来越受到重视,并逐渐成为研究热点,国家和研究机构应继续加强合作,推动红球菌领域的继续发展。