Knowledge of Colombian biodiversity: published and indexed
Knowledge of Colombian biodiversity: published and indexed
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10531-013-0560-y
复制
发表时间：
2013-11-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Arbelaez-Cortes, Enrique
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Arbelaez-Cortes, Enrique
记录已发表的关于超级生物多样性国家生物多样性的研究报告的模式，可以提供关于全球生物多样性知识的宝贵见解。在这里，我提出的结果从5,264索引出版物在哥伦比亚生物多样性在1990-2011年期间出版的文献计量学分析，并通过搜索知识的网络数据库收集。我把研究分成六个相互重叠的主题：分类群列表、新分类群、新记录、保护、遗传多样性和其他。出版物还按地理位置和所研究的分类组进行了分类。我发现每年研究数量的变化，呈现出数量增加的长期趋势。这些研究涉及哥伦比亚31个大陆部门以及大西洋和太平洋，其中包括47个门的98个分类类。然而，在分类、地理和主题覆盖方面存在很大的偏见。例如，75%的研究集中在动物身上;大西洋的研究数量最多，其次是安蒂奥基亚和考卡谷省。遗传多样性和保护是研究最少的主题。我还发现，哥伦比亚研究人员和哥伦比亚机构在记录该国杰出的生物多样性方面发挥了重要作用。然而，哥伦比亚生物学家仍然更喜欢在国内或拉丁美洲期刊上发表文章，这些期刊主要是区域性的，国际知名度较低。我在这里提出的模式可以优化和指导哥伦比亚生物多样性的研究有重要的意义，本文的结论与一些建议。
Documenting patterns of published studies on the biodiversity of megadiverse countries can offer valuable insights on global biodiversity knowledge. Here, I present results from a bibliometric analysis of 5,264 indexed publications on biodiversity in Colombia published during the period 1990-2011 and gathered by searching the Web of Knowledge database. I classified studies into six overlapping subjects: taxa lists, new taxa, new records, conservation, genetic diversity, and other. Publications were also classified by geographic location and the taxonomic group studied. I found variation in the number of studies per year, which presented a long-term trend of increasing volume. The 31 continental departments of Colombia and both the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans were represented in the studies, which included 98 taxonomic classes from 47 phyla. However, there were strong biases in taxonomic, geographic, and subject coverage. For instance, 75 % of studies focused on animals; and the Atlantic Ocean showed the highest number of studies, followed by Antioquia and Valle del Cauca departments. Genetic diversity and conservation were the least-studied subjects. I also found that Colombian researchers and Colombian institutions have played an important role in documenting the country's outstanding biodiversity. However, Colombian biologists still prefer to publish in domestic or Latin American journals, which are mainly regional and have low international visibility. The patterns I present here can have important implications for optimizing and guiding research on Colombian biodiversity, and the paper concludes with some recommendations.