生物多样性数据共享和发表: 进展和建议

生物多样性研究、保护实践、自然资源管理及科学决策等越来越依赖于大量数据的共享和整合。虽然关于数据共享的呼吁和实践越来越多, 但很多科学家仍然主动或被动地拒绝共享数据。关于数据共享, 现实中存在一些认知和技术上的障碍, 比如科学家不愿意共享数据, 担心同行竞争, 认为缺少足够的回报, 不熟悉相关数据保存机构, 缺少简便的数据提交工具, 没有足够时间和经费等。解决这些问题及改善共享文化的关键在于使共享者获得适当的回报(比如数据引用)。基于同行评审的数据发表被认为不但能够为生产、管理和共享数据的科学家提供一种激励机制, 并且能够有效地促进数据再利用。因而, 数据发表作为数据共享的方式之一, 近来引起了较多关注, 在生物多样性领域出现了专门发表数据论文的期刊。在采取数据论文的模式上, 数据保存机构和科技期刊采用联合数据政策在促进数据共享方面可能更具可行性。本文总结了数据共享和发表方面的进展, 讨论了数据论文能在何种程度上促进数据共享, 以及数据共享和数据发表的关系等问题, 提出如下建议: (1)个体科学家应努力践行数据共享; (2)使用DOI号解决数据所有权和数据引用的问题; (3)科技期刊和数据保存机构联合采用更加合理和严格的数据保存政策; (4)资助机构和研究单位应当在数据共享中起到更重要的作用。     

不懈探索, 努力引领中国生物多样性科学发展——《生物多样性》创刊三十周年回顾

为更好地推动我国生物多样性科学的发展, 提升期刊服务能力, 并庆祝创刊30周年, 我们梳理了《生物多样性》2013-2022年的主要进展。(1)近10年中, 期刊的特色进一步凸显。围绕学科前沿、国家重大行动计划、履约等领域共策划出版56个专辑/专题, 新设立编者按、生物编目、数据论文、保护与治理对策、生物文化多样性等特色栏目, 通过发表数据论文、生物编目等文章推动数据共享, 以及通过鼓励学术争鸣、探索中文期刊的国际传播等举措使期刊的特色进一步凸显。(2)期刊载文量快速增加, 报道的内容不断拓展。研究方向由前20年的61个增加为目前的78个, 90%左右的文章聚焦于生物多样性保护、环境科学/生态学等领域; 植物学、动物学、微生物学的稿件分别占41.79%、47.48%和4.61%。基于关键词的文献计量分析表明, 近10年刊登的文章关键词聚类为遗传多样性、群落结构、红外相机、红色名录、生物多样性公约、国家公园、植物多样性、分类学和地理分布等9个子领域。培养了大批生物多样性人才, 10年中共有4,665位作者署名(作者记录数6,295), 发表文章最多的前20位作者主要来自中国科学院相关研究所、中国环境科学研究院、北京大学等机构, 其中60%为编委。(3)刊登的论文被广泛引用和下载。根据中国知网数据(排除了学位论文和会议论文, 2022年10月18日), 近10年刊登的文章有1,211篇累计被引用13,507次, 平均每篇被引11次以上; 网上下载量从2012年的6.64万次增加到2021年的23.85万次。有5篇文章入选中国科协优秀科技论文或中国百篇最具影响国内学术论文; 以国家公园、红外相机、红色名录、多功能性、生物入侵为关键词的文章是受关注的热点。《生物多样性》的影响因子和总被引频次在生物学领域一直排名前列; 是《科技期刊世界影响力指数(WJCI)报告》中全球保护生物学领域唯一的中国期刊, 2019年和2020年分别位列23/48和25/49位。最后我们探讨了今后如何继续引领中国生物多样性研究和保护、建设一流科技期刊面临的挑战和对策以及如何进一步提升科学传播能力。     

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。     

气候变化背景下生物入侵研究态势的文献计量分析

生物入侵严重威胁生物多样性与生态系统健康,对全球环境、经济造成极大损失,而快速的气候变化显著影响外来生物的扩散和入侵进程。探讨气候变化背景下生物入侵研究态势能够从宏观上把握该领域的国际研究现状与热点,为深入理解外来种入侵机制和制定合理的防治策略提供参考。该文基于最近27 a间(1990—2016年)科学文献数据库Web of Science中科学引文索引扩展版(SCI-E)数据,利用TDA等统计工具对气候变化下生物入侵方面的研究进行了文献计量分析。结果表明:27 a间共发表论文1 736篇,论文数量整体保持增长态势,2009年开始进入快速发展阶段;该领域的研究涉及环境科学与生态学、生物多样性保护、植物学等多个学科;澳大利亚莫纳什大学Chown SL教授发文量最高(35篇);美国的总发文量(708篇)和高被引、高影响因子论文数量均居世界首位;发文量最多的研究机构是加利福尼亚大学(93篇),中国科学院发文量居世界第10位(27篇);Biological Invasions是刊文量最大的学术杂志;物种分布模型、生物多样性、全球变暖、风险评估等是近年来该领域的研究热点;中国共发表论文52篇,中国科学院是国内最大的发文机构,其中,动物研究所、武汉植物园、植物研究所的发文量居中科院科研系统前三名;中国在气候变化下生物入侵领域的高被引、高影响因子论文数量及国际合作强度亟待提升。未来需重点关注气候变化下生物入侵的预测与风险评估、生物入侵与生物多样性关系、入侵物种的系统进化、入侵生态系统的多营养级关系、海洋生物入侵、生物入侵与人类健康等问题。     

中国生物多样性研究文献计量分析

生物多样性是人类赖以生存的重要物质基础，中国在生物多样性研究领域做了大量的工作，发表了众多有价值的学术论文。通过文献计量方法，对2009-2018年中国生物多样性研究领域WOS（Web of Science）和CNKI（中国知网）数据库收录论文的数量及被引情况、载文期刊分布等进行统计；并借助CiteSpace文献可视化软件，分析论文的作者合作、合作机构、国家（地区）合作和研究热点等。结果表明：2009-2018年间，中国生物多样性研究领域共发表论文17035篇，其中CNKI收录文献13365篇，WOS收录文献3670篇；年度发文总量以及WOS年度发文量总体呈上升趋势；CNKI文献被引频次最高的论文是于2009年发表在《生物多样性》上的"植物群落清查的主要内容、方法和技术规范"，WOS文献被引频次最高的论文是于2011年发表在Global Change Biology上的"TRY-a global database of plant traits"；朴世龙教授、骆亦其教授和唐志尧教授等是基于WOS文献的生物多样性研究领域核心作者，王得祥教授、马克平研究员和张文辉教授等基于CNKI文献的生物多样性研究领域主要作者；WOS文献与CNKI文献发文量最多的机构均为中国科学院所属相关科研院所；与中国合作的国家或地区共有106个，包括美国、英国、澳大利亚等；《生态学报》和Global Change Biology分别是该领域中文和外文文献的重要期刊载体；基于WOS文献的研究热点为气候、土壤等环境因子变化对物种多样性的影响研究以及基于微卫星分子标记技术的物种遗传多样性研究，基于CNKI文献的研究热点为环境因子与群落结构的关系研究。上述研究结果从收录论文的角度，定量、客观、科学地描述了2009-2018年中国生物多样性研究状况及研究热点，以期促进中国生物多样性的深入研究，并为相关领域学者凝练研究动向和科学问题等提供参考信息。     

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。     

中国半翅目昆虫多样性和地理分布数据集

全球生物多样性逐渐丧失已成为最严重的环境问题之一, 探究各地生物多样性资源及形成机制是生态学和生物地理学领域关注的重要科学问题。生物多样性数据的整合和共享可以为相关研究的开展提供科学依据。昆虫是地球上多样性最高的生物类群, 但是由于目前关于昆虫多样性数据的整理不足, 相关研究较为缺乏。为了促进昆虫类群的多样性数据整理和共享工作的发展, 本研究选取昆虫纲中重要且多样的半翅目作为对象, 通过广泛的数据检索和收集, 系统整理了截至2017年已发表的中国半翅目昆虫的多样性及地理分布信息。数据集中共收集了102科2,090属7,822种半翅目昆虫的分类信息及其39,298条地理分布记录。该数据集可以为今后开展生物多样性格局、生物区系演化和害虫防治等方面的研究工作提供帮助。     

基于文献计量学的百合属植物研究态势分析

基于Web of Science（简称WoS）核心数据库检索了1998-2018年间百合属植物文献,利用CiteSpace软件从国家、机构、作者、期刊以及高被引文章等方面进行了文献计量学统计分析。1998-2018年间共发表百合属植物文章1 058篇,2006年后中国发表文章数量居榜首并呈波动增长,中国科学院发表的文章数量在研究机构中排名第一。排名前2位的作者均来自荷兰瓦赫宁根大学。发文量及影响力最大的期刊是Scientia Horticulturae。发文量前10位的研究百合属植物的文章80%属于基础科学和技术科学,研究热点集中于形态学、细胞和分子生物学方向。近5年被引频次最多的高被引论文集中在百合属植物活性物质的功能验证、活性成分及其在营养健康方面的功效等方向,这些领域成为百合属植物研究的新趋势。     

期刊评价指标解释

1.总被引频次指该期刊自创刊以来所登载的全部论文在统计当年的统计刊源中被引用的总次数.该指标可以客观地说明该期刊总体被使用和受重视的程度,以及在学术交流中的作用和地位.2.影响因子指某期刊前两年发表的论文在统计当年的被引用总次数除以该期刊在前两年内发表的论文总数     

期刊评价指标解释

1.总被引频次指该期刊自创刊以来所登载的全部论文在统计当年的统计刊源中被引用的总次数。该指标可以客观地说明该期刊总体被使用和受重视的程度,以及在学术交流中的作用和地位。2.影响因子指某期刊前两年发表的论文在统计当年的被引用总次数除以该期刊在前两年内发表的论文总数。这是一     

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.     

Systematic conservation planning: Trends and patterns among highly-cited papers

Systematic conservation planning (SCP) is a field of conservation biology concerned with the effective allocation of conservation efforts and the implementation of actions aiming to guarantee biodiversity persistence in the long-term and the efficient use of conservation resources. Here, we evaluated the main spatial-temporal trends and patterns among highly-cited papers in SCP. We considered “highly-cited” articles as those papers with at least 100 citations according to Web of Science database. A total of 132 highly-cited articles were published between 1989 and 2014, with the highest frequency at 2006. Papers were published in 25 different scientific journals (with a highlight for Conservation Biology and Biological Conservation) by researchers from 208 institutions and 25 countries (most from Australia and USA). Most of the analytical and methodological studies were carried out in the terrestrial environment, by considering more than one taxonomic group, and at a regional scale. Eleven studies included information on costs (e.g., economic or land use) in the prioritization process, and only one article considered information on other biodiversity dimensions such as phylogenetic diversity. Among analytical papers, 41 included only biodiversity data in the prioritization process, while 16 papers considered data on other features such as ecosystem services, biophysical factors, and vegetation. Furthermore, a plethora of different algorithms and software were used to perform the analyses. By analyzing the top-cited papers, we could track through time the main advances and stages of the development in SCP.     

Confundiendo al confuso: reflexiones sobre el factor de impacto,el índice h(irsch), el valor Q y otros cofactores que influyen en la felicidad del investigador

BackgroundThe need to evaluate curricula for sponsorship for research projects or professional promotion, has led to the search for tools that allow an objective valuation. However, the total number papers published, or citations of articles of a particular author, or the impact factor of the Journal where they are published are inadequate indicators for the evaluation of the quality and productivity of researchers. The h index, proposed by Hirsch, categorises the papers according to the number of citations per article. This tool appears to lack the limitations of other bibliometric tools but is less useful for non English-speaking authors.AimsTo propose and debate the usefulness of the existing bibliometric indicators and tools for the evaluation and categorization of researchers and scientific journals.MethodsSearch for papers on bibliometric tools.ResultsThere are some hot spots in the debate on the national and international evaluation of researchers’ productivity and quality of scientific journals. Opinions on impact factors and h index have been discussed. The positive discrimination, using the Q value, is proposed as an alternative for the evaluation of Spanish and Iberoamerican researchers.ConclusionsIt is very important de-mystify the importance of bibliometric indicators. The impact factor is useful for evaluating journals from the same scientific area but not for the evaluation of researchers’ curricula. For the comparison of curricula from two or more researchers, we must use the h index or the proposed Q value. the latter allows positive discrimination of the task for Spanish and Iberoamerican researchers.     

Incorrect Citations Give Unfair Credit to Review Authors in Ecology Journals

The number of citations that papers receive has become significant in measuring researchers'' scientific productivity, and such measurements are important when one seeks career opportunities and research funding. Skewed citation practices can thus have profound effects on academic careers. We investigated (i) how frequently authors misinterpret original information and (ii) how frequently authors inappropriately cite reviews instead of the articles upon which the reviews are based. To reach this aim, we carried a survey of ecology journals indexed in the Web of Science and assessed the appropriateness of citations of review papers. Reviews were significantly more often cited than regular articles. In addition, 22% of citations were inaccurate, and another 15% unfairly gave credit to the review authors for other scientists'' ideas. These practices should be stopped, mainly through more open discussion among mentors, researchers and students.     

Global biodiversity research during 1900–2009: a bibliometric analysis

We performed a bibliometric analysis of published biodiversity research for the period of 1900–2009, based on the Science Citation Index (SCI) database. Our analysis reveals the authorial, institutional, spatiotemporal, and categorical patterns in biodiversity research and provides an alternative demonstration of research advancements, which may serve as a potential guide for future research. The growth of article outputs has exploded since the 1990s, along with an increasing collaboration index, references, and citations. Ecology, environmental sciences, biodiversity conservations, and plant science were most frequently used subject categories in biodiversity studies, and Biological Conservation, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Conservation Biology and Biodiversity and Conservation were most active journals in this field. The United States was the largest contributor in global biodiversity research, as the U.S. produced the most single-country and collaborative articles, had the greatest number of top research institutions, and had a central position in collaboration networks. We perceived an increasing number of both internationally collaborative and inter-institutionally collaborative articles, with the latter form of collaboration being more prevalent than the former. A keyword analysis found several interesting terminology preferences, confirmed conservation’s central position as a topic in biodiversity research, revealed the adoption of advanced technologies, and demonstrated keen interest in both the patterns and underlying processes of ecosystems. Our study reveals patterns in scientific outputs and academic collaborations and serves as an alternative and innovative way of revealing global research trends in biodiversity.     

Two-year citations of JAPPL original articles: evidence of a relative age effect

Several indicators have been used to analyze scientific journals, with the impact factor and the number of citations in a 2-yr calendar time frame (2-YRC) being the most common factors. However, considering that the Journal of Applied Physiology (JAPPL) appears monthly and that calculations of these indicators are based on citations of papers published in previous years, we hypothesized that articles published at the beginning of the year would be cited more in the 2-YRC compared with those appearing in the last issues of the year, a phenomena known as a relative age effect. Our objective was to confirm the existence of a relative age effect in the 2-YRC for original articles published in JAPPL. From 2005 to 2008, a total of 1,726 original articles were published, according to the Web of Science, and 9,973 citations in 2-YRC, varying from 0 to 45, with a mean of 5.78 for individual papers. Although there were no differences in the number of original articles published in a given month (P = 0.99), the 2-YRC varied considerably throughout the year, being higher for those earlier issues of the year, as shown by the linear regression analysis (r(2) = 0.76; P < 0.001). The 2-YRC began at 6.62 during the first 3 mo of the year, dropping by 10% at each 3-mo period. In summary, the longer an article has been out there, the more citations it collects. The relative age effect is a potential confounding variable for the assessment and interpretation of 2-YRC (using calendar years) from JAPPL original articles.