English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/216646
Share/Impact:
Statistics
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:

Title

Global Deep-Sea Biodiversity Research Trends Highlighted by Science Mapping Approach

AuthorsCosta, Corrado; Fanelli, Emanuela ; Marini, S.; Danovaro, Roberto; Aguzzi, Jacopo
KeywordsDeep-sea biodiversity
Terms mapping
Scopus, bibliometric
VOSviewer
Publications trend
Issue DateJun-2020
PublisherFrontiers Media
CitationFrontiers in Marine Science 7: 384 (2020)
AbstractThe scientific literature available on deep-sea biodiversity is ample and covers a wide array of objectives, geographic areas, and topics. It also explores the links between ecosystem functioning and productivity as well as modeling, management, and exploitation. New statistical analytical tools now allow the comprehensive monitoring of the status of deep-sea research to highlight global research topics and their trends, which deserve further development and economic investments. Here, we used a science mapping approach to provide a global and systematic bibliometric synthesis of these current research topics and their trends to identify the size, growth, trajectory, and geographic distribution of scientific efforts as well as to highlight the emerging topics. A total of 1287 deep-sea biodiversity publications were retrieved from the Scopus database from 1993 to the present. Both established and emerging research topics were identified: (i) biogeochemical, microbial, and molecular analyses; (ii) biodiversity assessments; (iii) ecosystem conservation and management; and, finally, (iv) zoology and taxocoenosis. The temporal change in research activity (which was assessed by subdividing publications into blocks from 1993 to 2010 and 2011 to 2019) demonstrated that the ¿biogeochemical, microbial, and molecular analyses¿ cluster was not present from 1993 to 2010 since it was included in the cluster for ¿biodiversity assessments,¿ which it eventually diverged from in the following couple of decades. The United States took the dominant role in research, followed by the United Kingdom; Germany and France were also evidenced. China was particularly associated with the United States
Description17 pages, 7 figures, supplementary material https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.00384/full#supplementary-material.-- All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material
Publisher version (URL)https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00384
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/216646
Identifiersdoi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00384
e-issn: 2296-7745
Appears in Collections:(ICM) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Costa_et_al_2020.pdf4,64 MBUnknownView/Open
Costa_et_al_2020_Data_1.PDF244,81 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Costa_et_al_2020_Data_2.PDF328,11 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Costa_et_al_2020_Data_3.PDF6,86 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record
Review this work
 


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.