Examining the Impact of the National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy on the Citation Rates of Journal Articles

PurposeTo examine whether National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded articles that were archived in PubMed Central (PMC) after the release of the 2008 NIH Public Access Policy show greater scholarly impact than comparable articles not archived in PMC.MethodsA list of journals across several subject areas was developed from which to collect article citation data. Citation information and cited reference counts of the articles published in 2006 and 2009 from 122 journals were obtained from the Scopus database. The articles were separated into categories of NIH funded, non-NIH funded and whether they were deposited in PubMed Central. An analysis of citation data across a five-year timespan was performed on this set of articles.ResultsA total of 45,716 articles were examined, including 7,960 with NIH-funding. An analysis of the number of times these articles were cited found that NIH-funded 2006 articles in PMC were not cited significantly more than NIH-funded non-PMC articles. However, 2009 NIH funded articles in PMC were cited 26% more than 2009 NIH funded articles not in PMC, 5 years after publication. This result is highly significant even after controlling for journal (as a proxy of article quality and topic).ConclusionOur analysis suggests that factors occurring between 2006 and 2009 produced a subsequent boost in scholarly impact of PubMed Central. The 2008 Public Access Policy is likely to be one such factor, but others may have contributed as well (e.g., growing size and visibility of PMC, increasing availability of full-text linkouts from PubMed, and indexing of PMC articles by Google Scholar).     

Tafonomía de bivalvos holocenos en la costa del estuario de Bahía Blanca, Argentina

In the Bahía Blanca Estuary (Argentina), Holocene deposits are fossiliferous sand ridges originated by the last transgressive-regressive marine event. By means of ternary taphograms applied on valves of Brachidontes rodriguezi a taphonomic analysis was carried out in two ridges, both in the external and internal estuary area. Six taphonomic attributes were considered. The disarticulation and the fragmentation are higher in the external ridge, whereas the bioerosion and incrustation, both barely manifested, are similar in the two environmental settings. In the outer deposit, as much the abrasions as the dissolution of the shells are more intense. Genetically, it is considered that these shell concentrations were originated by multiepisodic storm events. Based on the taphonomic analysis, it arises that in the generation of the internal ridge waves of moderate energy with different sorting degrees prevailed, whereas in the formation of the external deposits waves of greater energy with smaller sorting capacity prevailed.     

Impact beyond the impact factor

The journal impact factor is an annually calculated number for each scientific journal, based on the average number of times its articles published in the two preceding years have been cited. It was originally devised as a tool for librarians and publishers to provide information about the citation performance of a journal as a whole, but over the last few decades it has increasingly been used to assess the quality of specific articles and the research performance of individual investigators, institutions, and countries. In addition to this clear abuse of the journal impact factor, several conceptual and technical issues limit its usability as a measure of journal reputation, especially when journals are compared across different fields. An author’s decision regarding the suitability of a scholarly journal for publication should, therefore, be based on the impact that this journal makes in the field of research, rather than on the journal impact factor.     

The scientific publications of AIFM members in 2015–2019: A survey of the FutuRuS working group

PurposeWithin the Italian Association of Medical Physics and Health Physics (AIFM) working group “FutuRuS” we carried out a survey regarding the number of the peer-reviewed articles by AIFM members.MethodsWe surveyed papers published in the years 2015–2019. Data extracted from Scopus included information regarding authors, title, journal, impact factor (IF), leading or standard authorship by AIFM members, keywords, type of collaboration (monocentric/multicentric/international), area of interest [radiation oncology (RO), radiology (RAD), nuclear medicine (NM), radioprotection (RP) and professional issue (PI)] and topics.ResultsWe found 1210 papers published in peer-reviewed journals: 48%, 22%, 16%, 6%, 2 and 6% in RO, RAD, NM, RP, PI and other topics, respectively. Forty-seven percent of the papers involved monocentric teams, 31% multicentric and 22% international collaborations. Leading authorship of AIFM members was in 56% of papers, with a corresponding IF equal to 52% of the total IF (3342, IF_mean = 2.8, IF_max = 35.4). The most represented journal was Physica Medica, with 15% of papers, while a relevant fraction of IF (54%) appeared in clinically oriented journals. The number of papers increased significantly between 2015 and 2016 and remained almost constant in 2017–2019.ConclusionsThis survey led to the first quantitative assessment of the number and theme distribution of peer-reviewed scientific articles contributed by AIFM members. It constitutes a ground basis to support future AIFM strategies and promote working groups on scientific activity of medical physicists, and to build the basis for rational comparison with other countries, first of all within Europe.     

Scientific publications in nephrology and urology journals from Chinese authors in East Asia: a 10-year survey of the literature

Background

Diseases of the kidneys and genitourinary tract are common health problems that affect people of all ages and demographic backgrounds. In this study, we compared the quantity and quality of nephrological and urological articles published in international journals from the three major regions of China: the mainland (ML), Hong Kong (HK), and Taiwan (TW).

Methods

Nephrological and urological articles originating from ML, TW, and HK that were published in 61 journals from 1999–2008 were retrieved from the PubMed database. We recorded the numbers of total articles, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, case reports, impact factors (IF), citations, and articles published in the leading general-medicine journals. We used these data to compare the quantity and quality of publication output from the three regions.

Results

The total number of articles increased significantly from 1999 to 2008 in the three regions. The number of articles from ML has exceeded that from HK since 2004, and surpassed that from TW in 2008. Publications from TW had the highest accumulated IF, total citations of articles, and the most articles published in leading general-medicine journals. However, HK publications had the highest average IF. Although ML produced the largest quantity of articles, it exhibited the lowest quality among the three regions.

Conclusion

The number of nephrological and urological publications originating from the three major regions of China increased significantly from 1999 to 2008. The annual number of publications by ML researchers exceeded those from TW and HK. However, the quality of articles from TW and HK was higher than that from ML.     

Trends in HSPB5 research: a 36-year bibliometric analysis

HSPB5 (heat shock protein B5), also known as αB-crystallin, is one of the most widespread and populous of the ten human small heat shock proteins (sHsps). Over the past decades, extensive research has been conducted on HSPB5. However, few studies have statistically analyzed these publications. Herein, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to track the global research trend and current development status of HSPB5 research from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database between 1985 and 2020. Our results demonstrate that 1220 original articles cited 54,778 times in 391 scholarly journals were published. Visualization analyses reveal that the Journal of Biological Chemistry was the most influential journal with 85 articles. The USA dominated this field with 520 publications (42.62%), followed by Japan with 149 publications (12.21%), and Kato contributed the largest number of publications. Most related publications were published in journals focusing on biochemistry molecular biology, cell biology, neurosciences neurology, and ophthalmology. In addition, keyword co-occurrence analyses identify three predominant research topics: expression of HSPB5, chaperone studies for HSPB5, and pathological studies of HSPB5. This study provides valuable guidance for researchers and leads to collaborative opportunities between diverse research interests to be integrated for HSPB5 research.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12192-021-01220-6.     

I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work?

Scientists who are members of an editorial board have been accused of preferentially publishing their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Reputation and academic standing do depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work and the question does arise as to whether publication mainly occurs in the self-edited journal. This investigation was designed to determine whether editorial board members of five urological journals were more likely to publish their research reports in their own rather than in other journals. A retrospective analysis was conducted for all original reports published from 2001–2010 by 65 editorial board members nominated to the boards of five impact leading urologic journals in 2006. Publications before editorial board membership, 2001–2005, and publications within the period of time as an editorial board member, 2006–2010, were identified. The impact factors of the journals were also recorded over the time period 2001–2010 to see whether a change in impact factor correlated with publication locality. In the five journals as a whole, scientific work was not preferentially published in the journal in which the scientists served as editor. However, significant heterogeneity among the journals was evident. One journal showed a significant increase in the amount of published papers in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship, three journals showed no change and one journal showed a highly significant decrease in publishing in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship.     

Una nueva especie de Neuryurus Ameghino (Mammalia, Glyptodontidae) en el Pleistoceno tardío de la Mesopotamia de Argentina

Among the South American Pleistocene Glyptodontidae (Xenarthra, Cingulata), one of the most scarcely represented genus in the fossil record is Neuryurus Ameghino, in which the only well characterized species, until now, is Neuryurus rudis (Gervais), coming from the Ensenadan (early-middle Pleistocene) of the Pampean region, Argentina. In this contribution, we report and describe a new species of Neuryurus, coming from the Arroyo Feliciano Formation (early Lujanian; ca. 130 ka), Entre Ríos province, Argentina, in a particular palaebiogeographic context, more associated with the western sector of Uruguay and southern Brazil than the Pampean region. From a morphological perspective, this new taxon is characterized by: (a) the remarkable development of the foramina at the exposed surface of the osteoderms of the dorsal carapace, showing un aspect almost spongy; (b) the large diameter of the perforations observed in the ventral surface of the osteoderms, resembling to those present in the dorsal surface of the osteoderms of the Glyptodontidae Doedicurinae; (c) the evident thickness of the osteoderms, as in Glyptodon Owen; (d) area of contact and articulation of adjacent osteoderms very denticulate, with deep osseous interdigitating projections, as in Glyptodon and Glyptotherium Osborn, but here more evident; (e) larger osteoderms of the dorsal carapace showing, in the dorsal surface, many little conical tubercles, having some resemblance to Panochthus tuberculatus Burmeister. The presence of this new species in the early late Pleistocene of the Mesopotamic region is another element that adds to the biogeographical characterization of this particular area, especially evident during the warm and humid pulses of the late Pleistocene. In turn, this species represents the most complete record of the genus outside the Pampean region and partially complete the stratigraphic and geographic distribution of the genus.     

Academic Impact of Qualitative Studies in Healthcare: Bibliometric Analysis

Context

Although qualitative studies are becoming more appreciated in healthcare, the number of publications of quality studies remains low. Little is known about the frequency and characteristics of citation in qualitative studies.

Objective

To compare the academic impact of qualitative studies to that of two quantitative studies: systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials.

Methods

Publications in BMJ between 1997 and 2006 (BMJ’s median impact factor was 7.04 during this period) employing qualitative methods were matched to two quantitative studies appearing the same year using PubMed. Using Web of Science, citations within a 24-month publication period were determined. Additionally, three hypotheses were examined: qualitative studies are 1) infrequently cited in original articles or reviews; 2) rarely cited by authors in non-English-speaking countries; and 3) more frequently cited in non-medical disciplines (e.g., psychology or sociology).

Results

A total of 121 qualitative studies, 270 systematic reviews, and 515 randomised controlled trials were retrieved. Qualitative studies were cited a total of 1,089 times, with a median of 7.00 times (range, 0–34) for each study. Matched systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials were cited 2,411times and 1,600 times, respectively. With respect to citing documents, original articles and reviews exceeded 60% for each study design. Relative to quantitative studies, qualitative studies were cited more often by authors in English-speaking countries. With respect to subject area, medical disciplines were more frequently cited than non-medical disciplines for all three study designs (>80%).

Conclusion

The median number of citations for qualitative studies was almost the same as the median of BMJ’s impact factor during the survey period. For a suitable evaluation of qualitative studies in healthcare, it will be necessary to develop a reporting framework and include explicit discussions of clinical implications when reporting findings. Coordination between researchers and editors will be needed to achieve this goal.     

A simple index for the high-citation tail of citation distribution to quantify research performance in countries and institutions

Background

Conventional scientometric predictors of research performance such as the number of papers, citations, and papers in the top 1% of highly cited papers cannot be validated in terms of the number of Nobel Prize achievements across countries and institutions. The purpose of this paper is to find a bibliometric indicator that correlates with the number of Nobel Prize achievements.

Methodology/Principal Findings

This study assumes that the high-citation tail of citation distribution holds most of the information about high scientific performance. Here I propose the x-index, which is calculated from the number of national articles in the top 1% and 0.1% of highly cited papers and has a subtractive term to discount highly cited papers that are not scientific breakthroughs. The x-index, the number of Nobel Prize achievements, and the number of national articles in Nature or Science are highly correlated. The high correlations among these independent parameters demonstrate that they are good measures of high scientific performance because scientific excellence is their only common characteristic. However, the x-index has superior features as compared to the other two parameters. Nobel Prize achievements are low frequency events and their number is an imprecise indicator, which in addition is zero in most institutions; the evaluation of research making use of the number of publications in prestigious journals is not advised.

Conclusion

The x-index is a simple and precise indicator for high research performance.     

Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?

Background

The number of retracted scientific publications has risen sharply, but it is unclear whether this reflects an increase in publication of flawed articles or an increase in the rate at which flawed articles are withdrawn.

Methods and Findings

We examined the interval between publication and retraction for 2,047 retracted articles indexed in PubMed. Time-to-retraction (from publication of article to publication of retraction) averaged 32.91 months. Among 714 retracted articles published in or before 2002, retraction required 49.82 months; among 1,333 retracted articles published after 2002, retraction required 23.82 months (p<0.0001). This suggests that journals are retracting papers more quickly than in the past, although recent articles requiring retraction may not have been recognized yet. To test the hypothesis that time-to-retraction is shorter for articles that receive careful scrutiny, time-to-retraction was correlated with journal impact factor (IF). Time-to-retraction was significantly shorter for high-IF journals, but only ∼1% of the variance in time-to-retraction was explained by increased scrutiny. The first article retracted for plagiarism was published in 1979 and the first for duplicate publication in 1990, showing that articles are now retracted for reasons not cited in the past. The proportional impact of authors with multiple retractions was greater in 1972–1992 than in the current era (p<0.001). From 1972–1992, 46.0% of retracted papers were written by authors with a single retraction; from 1993 to 2012, 63.1% of retracted papers were written by single-retraction authors (p<0.001).

Conclusions

The increase in retracted articles appears to reflect changes in the behavior of both authors and institutions. Lower barriers to publication of flawed articles are seen in the increase in number and proportion of retractions by authors with a single retraction. Lower barriers to retraction are apparent in an increase in retraction for “new” offenses such as plagiarism and a decrease in the time-to-retraction of flawed work.     

Social and Natural Sciences Differ in Their Research Strategies,Adapted to Work for Different Knowledge Landscapes

Do different fields of knowledge require different research strategies? A numerical model exploring different virtual knowledge landscapes, revealed two diverging optimal search strategies. Trend following is maximized when the popularity of new discoveries determine the number of individuals researching it. This strategy works best when many researchers explore few large areas of knowledge. In contrast, individuals or small groups of researchers are better in discovering small bits of information in dispersed knowledge landscapes. Bibliometric data of scientific publications showed a continuous bipolar distribution of these strategies, ranging from natural sciences, with highly cited publications in journals containing a large number of articles, to the social sciences, with rarely cited publications in many journals containing a small number of articles. The natural sciences seem to adapt their research strategies to landscapes with large concentrated knowledge clusters, whereas social sciences seem to have adapted to search in landscapes with many small isolated knowledge clusters. Similar bipolar distributions were obtained when comparing levels of insularity estimated by indicators of international collaboration and levels of country-self citations: researchers in academic areas with many journals such as social sciences, arts and humanities, were the most isolated, and that was true in different regions of the world. The work shows that quantitative measures estimating differences between academic disciplines improve our understanding of different research strategies, eventually helping interdisciplinary research and may be also help improve science policies worldwide.     

Network Effects on Scientific Collaborations

Background

The analysis of co-authorship network aims at exploring the impact of network structure on the outcome of scientific collaborations and research publications. However, little is known about what network properties are associated with authors who have increased number of joint publications and are being cited highly.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Measures of social network analysis, for example network centrality and tie strength, have been utilized extensively in current co-authorship literature to explore different behavioural patterns of co-authorship networks. Using three SNA measures (i.e., degree centrality, closeness centrality and betweenness centrality), we explore scientific collaboration networks to understand factors influencing performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (tie strength between authors) of such networks. A citation count is the number of times an article is cited by other articles. We use co-authorship dataset of the research field of ‘steel structure’ for the year 2005 to 2009. To measure the strength of scientific collaboration between two authors, we consider the number of articles co-authored by them. In this study, we examine how citation count of a scientific publication is influenced by different centrality measures of its co-author(s) in a co-authorship network. We further analyze the impact of the network positions of authors on the strength of their scientific collaborations. We use both correlation and regression methods for data analysis leading to statistical validation. We identify that citation count of a research article is positively correlated with the degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of its co-author(s). Also, we reveal that degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of authors in a co-authorship network are positively correlated with the strength of their scientific collaborations.

Conclusions/Significance

Authors’ network positions in co-authorship networks influence the performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (i.e., tie strength) of scientific collaborations.     

A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior

Alongside the growing concerns regarding predatory journal growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. Among them, we explored the usefulness of the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index (level of inequality in the distribution of authorship among authors) as tools to identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors. We examined whether the PPMP, complemented by the Gini index, could be useful for identifying cases of potential editorial bias, using all articles in a sample of 5,468 biomedical journals indexed in the National Library of Medicine. For articles published between 2015 and 2019, the median PPMP was 2.9%, and 5% of journal exhibited a PPMP of 10.6% or more. Among the journals with the highest PPMP or Gini index values, where a few authors were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications, a random sample was manually examined, revealing that the most prolific author was part of the editorial board in 60 cases (61%). The papers by the most prolific authors were more likely to be accepted for publication within 3 weeks of their submission. Results of analysis on a subset of articles, excluding nonresearch articles, were consistent with those of the principal analysis. In most journals, publications are distributed across a large number of authors. Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications. To enhance trust in their practices, journals need to be transparent about their editorial and peer review practices.

Alongside the growing concerns regarding predatory journal growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. This study explores the relationship between hyper-prolific authors and a journal’s editorial team, finding a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications.     

Rising Publication Delays Inflate Journal Impact Factors

Journal impact factors have become an important criterion to judge the quality of scientific publications over the years, influencing the evaluation of institutions and individual researchers worldwide. However, they are also subject to a number of criticisms. Here we point out that the calculation of a journal’s impact factor is mainly based on the date of publication of its articles in print form, despite the fact that most journals now make their articles available online before that date. We analyze 61 neuroscience journals and show that delays between online and print publication of articles increased steadily over the last decade. Importantly, such a practice varies widely among journals, as some of them have no delays, while for others this period is longer than a year. Using a modified impact factor based on online rather than print publication dates, we demonstrate that online-to-print delays can artificially raise a journal’s impact factor, and that this inflation is greater for longer publication lags. We also show that correcting the effect of publication delay on impact factors changes journal rankings based on this metric. We thus suggest that indexing of articles in citation databases and calculation of citation metrics should be based on the date of an article’s online appearance, rather than on that of its publication in print.     

Scientific publications of Costa Rica in Science Citation Index bibliometric analysis of the period 1999-2001

This study analyzed the publications of authors from Costa Rican institutions that were included in the Science Citation Index (SCI) during 1999-2001. Out of the 722 references detected, distributed in 328 journals, 90.7% corresponded to original research articles. The total productivity figures showed a moderately increasing trend, both in absolute and population-adjusted terms, in concordance with previous data recorded for the period 1980-1998. The contribution of Revista de Biología Tropical to these figures corresponded to 10.0%, 8.9%, and 19.1%, for the years 1999, 2000, and 2001, respectively. The subject distribution of articles followed a similar pattern to that described for 1980-1998, with a predominance of biomedical (33.3%) and biological (27.5%) sciences, followed by agronomical (15.5%) sciences, chemistry (13.6%), physics (5.0%), geological sciences (3.6%), and mathematics (1.5%). Citation analyses for individual publications (up to July 15, 2002) revealed that only 45.2% of the articles had been cited at least once. The ten most cited references were analyzed, varying from 26 to 114 citations. The average citation per article was 2.60, and the average number of authors per article was 2.92. In agreement with data from 1980-1998, the University of Costa Rica appeared as the institution with highest productivity of SCI publications during 1999-2001, with a contribution of 50.0%. The percentage of publications performed without the participation of foreign co-authors showed a change in its decreasing trend of 1980-1998, stabilizing near the range of 25-30% during the period 1999-2001.     

Implantación de una Unidad de Ortogeriatría de Agudos en un hospital de segundo nivel

Background

Patients with hip fracture (HF), due to their characteristics, require a specific support. The Acute Orthogeriatric Unit (OGU) has been shown to be one of the most beneficial.

Objective

To evaluate the main variables of HF patients treated at an OGU and compare them with the previous referral model (RC).

Material and methods

A prospective observational study with retrospective control was conducted on 169 patients, split into two groups. In the RC group, patients were admitted to conventional trauma ward. In the OGU group, an early geriatric assessment was performed, and patients were simultaneously attended daily by the orthopaedic surgeon, nurse and geriatrician, and the surgery times, work load, discharge and destination, were planned in a weekly meeting with the rest of professionals.

Results

A total of 71 patients were included in the RC group and 96 in the OGU group. The preoperative characteristics were similar, except for a slightly higher comorbidity in the OGU group. The OGU patients were operated on earlier (3.82±2.08 vs 4.61±2.5 days; P<.32), and overall hospital stay was reduced by 28% (11.84±4.04 vs 16.46±8.4 days; P<.001). The functional efficiency (Barthel Index at discharge-Barthel Index at admission/overall stay - stay before surgery) was higher in the OGU group (1.56±0.7 vs 2.61±1.1; P<.05). There were no differences in functional status, mortality or discharge location.

Conclusions

The OGU is a level of care that provides effective medical care in HF patients in general hospitals.     

Why Most Biomedical Findings Echoed by Newspapers Turn Out to be False: The Case of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Context

Because positive biomedical observations are more often published than those reporting no effect, initial observations are often refuted or attenuated by subsequent studies.

Objective

To determine whether newspapers preferentially report on initial findings and whether they also report on subsequent studies.

Methods

We focused on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Using Factiva and PubMed databases, we identified 47 scientific publications on ADHD published in the 1990s and soon echoed by 347 newspapers articles. We selected the ten most echoed publications and collected all their relevant subsequent studies until 2011. We checked whether findings reported in each “top 10” publication were consistent with previous and subsequent observations. We also compared the newspaper coverage of the “top 10” publications to that of their related scientific studies.

Results

Seven of the “top 10” publications were initial studies and the conclusions in six of them were either refuted or strongly attenuated subsequently. The seventh was not confirmed or refuted, but its main conclusion appears unlikely. Among the three “top 10” that were not initial studies, two were confirmed subsequently and the third was attenuated. The newspaper coverage of the “top 10” publications (223 articles) was much larger than that of the 67 related studies (57 articles). Moreover, only one of the latter newspaper articles reported that the corresponding “top 10” finding had been attenuated. The average impact factor of the scientific journals publishing studies echoed by newspapers (17.1 n = 56) was higher (p<0.0001) than that corresponding to related publications that were not echoed (6.4 n = 56).

Conclusion

Because newspapers preferentially echo initial ADHD findings appearing in prominent journals, they report on uncertain findings that are often refuted or attenuated by subsequent studies. If this media reporting bias generalizes to health sciences, it represents a major cause of distortion in health science communication.     

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.     

Effects of suspended mussel culture on benthic-pelagic coupling in a coastal upwelling system (Ría de Vigo, NW Iberian Peninsula)

The influence of suspended mussel culture on the benthic-pelagic coupling was evaluated in the Ría de Vigo, in the coastal upwelling system of the NW Iberian Peninsula, during the month of July 2004. Measurements of water column properties were carried out at three stations in the Ría de Vigo: under a mussel raft (1), and at two reference sites in the main channel (2) and in the inner part (3) of the Ría. Dissolved nutrients, dissolved oxygen and inorganic carbon benthic fluxes were measured by means of a benthic chamber at stations 1 and 3. Sediment traps were deployed at 6 locations to estimate vertical fluxes. The water column structure at the three study stations was very similar, characterized by upwelling conditions during the second week of July and a posterior stratification showing a strong thermocline, with a depth fluctuation mainly modulated by the shelf wind regime. Vertical POC fluxes underneath the mussel raft (3 g C m⁻² d^− 1) were 3 times higher than those obtained between rafts and 10 times higher than in the main channel reference site. Dissolved oxygen, ammonium, silicate and phosphate benthic fluxes were significantly higher under the raft than at the inner Ría reference site. A 1D carbon budget showed the importance of benthic metabolism under the raft (2.3 ± 0.8 g C m^− 2 d^− 1), being higher than the organic carbon produced at the photic layer (0.7 ± 0.3 g C m^− 2 d^− 1), as a result of higher organic loading compared to the inner Ría reference site. The results show for the first time the important role that suspended mussel cultures play in the benthic-pelagic coupling in this coastal upwelling ecosystem.