Trends in Fisheries Science from 2000 to 2009: A Bibliometric Study

Reviews in Fisheries Science

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 70-79

  Jarić, Ivan ^a,b   Cvijanović, Gorčin ^a   Knežević Jarić, Jelena ^a,c   Lenhardt, Mirjana ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE   (Serbia)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY AND INLAND FISHERIES   (Germany)

^c Ecological Society Endemit   (Serbia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE   (Serbia)

Author keywords

bibliometric analysis; bibliometry; fisheries science; fishery; trend

Indexed keywords

SALMONIDAE;

EID: 84863975837     PISSN: 10641262     EISSN: 15476553     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10641262.2012.659775     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Abbell, R. 2002. Conservation biology for the biodiversity crisis: A freshwater follow-up. Conserv. Biol, 16: 1435-1437.
2. Annan, K. 2003. A challenge to the world's scientists. Science, 299: 1485
3. Arlinghaus, R., Johnson, B. M. and Wolter, C. 2008. The past, present and future role of limnology in freshwater fisheries science. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol., 93: 541-549.
4. Azevedo, P. G., Mesquita, F. O. and Young, R. J. 2010. Fishing for gaps in science: A bibliographic analysis of Brazilian freshwater ichthyology from 1986 to 2005. J. Fish Biol., 76: 2177-2193.
5. Borsi, B. and Schubert, A. 2011. Agrifood research in Europe: A global perspective. Scientometrics, 86: 133-154.
6. Campana, S. E., Chouinard, G. A., Hanson, J. M., Fréchet, A. and Brattey, J. 2000. Otolith elemental fingerprints as biological tracers of fish stocks. Fish. Res., 46: 343-357.
7. Cazorla, A. L. 2000. Age structure of the population of weakfish Cynoscion guatucupa (Cuvier) in the Bahía Blanca waters, Argentina. Fish. Res., 46: 279-286.
8. Garcia, S. M. and Grainger, R. J. R. 2005. Gloom and doom? The future of marine capture fisheries. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. B, 360: 21-46.
9. Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A. and von Ins, M. 2008. Comparisons of results of publication counting using different methods. Scientometrics, 77: 147-176.
10. Glänzel, W. and Schubert, A. 2003. A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56: 357-367.
11. Harrison, A. L. 2006. Who's who in Conservation Biology-an authorship analysis. Conserv. Biol., 20: 652-657.
12. Hicks, D. M. and Katz, J. S. 1996. Where is science going?. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val., 21: 379-406.
13. Holmgren, M. and Schnitzer, S. A. 2004. Science on the rise in developing countries. PLoS Biol., 2: 0010-0013.
14. Hsieh, W. H., Chiu, W. T., Lee, Y. S. and Ho, Y. S. 2004. Bibliometric analysis of patent ductus arteriosus treatments. Scientometrics, 60: 205-215.
15. Limburg, K. E., Landergren, P., Westin, L., Elfman, M. and Kristiansson, P. 2001. Flexible modes of anadromy in Baltic sea trout: Making the most of marginal spawning streams. J. Fish Biol., 59: 682-695.
16. Neff, M. W. and Corley, E. A. 2009. 35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics, 80: 657-682.
17. Nikolic, N., Baglinière, J. L., Rigaud, C., Gardes, C., Masquilier, M. L. and Taverny, C. 2011. Bibliometric analysis of diadromous fish research from 1970s to 2010: A case study of seven species. Scientometrics, 88: 929-947.
18. Olden, J. D., Kennard, M. J., Leprieur, F., Tedesco, P. A., Winemiller, K. O. and García-Berthou, E. 2010. Conservation biogeography of freshwater fishes: recent progress and future challenges. Divers. Distrib., 16: 496-513.
19. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Pitcher, T. J., Sumaila, U. R., Walters, C. J., Watson, R. and Zeller, D. 2002. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature, 418: 689-695.
20. Pauly, D., Watson, R. and Alder, J. 2005. Global trends in world fisheries: impacts on marine ecosystems and food security. Philos. T. Roy. Soc. B, 360: 5-12.
21. Porter, A. L. and Rafols, I. 2009. Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics, 81: 719-745.
22. Qiu, H. and Chen, Y. F. 2009. Bibliometric analysis of biological invasions research during the period of 1991 to 2007. Scientometrics, 81: 601-610.
23. Schmolke, A., Thorbek, P., DeAngelis, D. L. and Grimm, V. 2010. Ecological models supporting environmental decision making: a strategy for the future. Trends Ecol. Evol., 25: 479-486.
24. Smith, T. D. and Link, J. S. 2005. Autopsy your dead... and living: A proposal for fisheries science, fisheries management and fisheries. Fish Fisheries, 6: 73-87.
25. Sodhi, N. S and Liow, L. H. 2000. Improving conservation biology research in Southeast Asia. Conserv. Biol., 14: 1211-1212.
26. Stocks, G., Seales, L., Panlagua, F., Maehr, E. and Bruna, E. M. 2008. The geographical and institutional distribution of ecological research in the tropics. Biotropica, 40: 397-404.
27. Symes, D. 2006. Fisheries governance: a coming of age for fisheries social science?. Fish. Res., 81: 113-117.
28. Symes, D. and Hoefnagel, E. 2010. Fisheries policy, research and the social sciences in Europe: Challenges for the 21st century. Mar. Policy, 34: 268-275.
29. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2009. Human development report 2009, 229New York: United Nations Development Programme. Available from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2009_EN_Complete.pdf
30. UNESCO. 2001. The state of science and technology in the world, 1996-1997, 57Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.