Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Vaz,U. L.
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Cunha,H. F., Nabout,J. C.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Biology
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842015000800017
Resumo: Abstract Recently, ecological niche models have been employed to investigate the potential geographical distribution of species. However, it is necessary to analyze the vast number of publications on this topic to understand the trends and biases of research using ecological niche models (ENMs). Therefore, this study aims to investigate trends in the scientific literature regarding studies on ENMs. For the quantitative analysis of the literature on ENMs, we performed a search in the Thomson ISI (Web of Science) database between 1991 and 2013. The search identified 3042 papers containing preselected keywords in either the title or abstract. The results showed that the number of papers has increased over the years (r=0.77, P<0.001), with a sharp increase in recent years, highlighting the widespread use of the ENMs. There was an increase in the diversity of journals that published papers about ENMs (r=0.97, P<0.001). The research was conducted in different countries, predominantly the United States of America (550 papers), and the most commonly used method was the Maximum Entropy method (312 papers). Regarding the taxonomic group, most research has been conducted on plants (402 papers, or 28.36% of the total). There was no relationship between the modeling method used and the taxonomic group studied (χ2=4.8, P=0.15). Finally, the wide availability of biological, environmental and computational resources has elicited the broad use of tools for ENMs. Despite the conceptual discussions of the ENMs, this method is currently the most effective way to evaluate the potential geographical distribution of species, and to predict the distribution under different environmental conditions (i.e., future or past scenarios).
id IIE-1_d5e81bd0f83abcfeae78221f67f1a277
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1519-69842015000800017
network_acronym_str IIE-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Biology
repository_id_str
spelling Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche modelsscientometricspecies distribution modelMaximum EntropyAbstract Recently, ecological niche models have been employed to investigate the potential geographical distribution of species. However, it is necessary to analyze the vast number of publications on this topic to understand the trends and biases of research using ecological niche models (ENMs). Therefore, this study aims to investigate trends in the scientific literature regarding studies on ENMs. For the quantitative analysis of the literature on ENMs, we performed a search in the Thomson ISI (Web of Science) database between 1991 and 2013. The search identified 3042 papers containing preselected keywords in either the title or abstract. The results showed that the number of papers has increased over the years (r=0.77, P<0.001), with a sharp increase in recent years, highlighting the widespread use of the ENMs. There was an increase in the diversity of journals that published papers about ENMs (r=0.97, P<0.001). The research was conducted in different countries, predominantly the United States of America (550 papers), and the most commonly used method was the Maximum Entropy method (312 papers). Regarding the taxonomic group, most research has been conducted on plants (402 papers, or 28.36% of the total). There was no relationship between the modeling method used and the taxonomic group studied (χ2=4.8, P=0.15). Finally, the wide availability of biological, environmental and computational resources has elicited the broad use of tools for ENMs. Despite the conceptual discussions of the ENMs, this method is currently the most effective way to evaluate the potential geographical distribution of species, and to predict the distribution under different environmental conditions (i.e., future or past scenarios).Instituto Internacional de Ecologia2015-11-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842015000800017Brazilian Journal of Biology v.75 n.4 suppl.1 2015reponame:Brazilian Journal of Biologyinstname:Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)instacron:IIE10.1590/1519-6984.22713info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVaz,U. L.Cunha,H. F.Nabout,J. C.eng2015-12-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1519-69842015000800017Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bjb/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbjb@bjb.com.br||bjb@bjb.com.br1678-43751519-6984opendoar:2015-12-11T00:00Brazilian Journal of Biology - Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
title Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
spellingShingle Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
Vaz,U. L.
scientometric
species distribution model
Maximum Entropy
title_short Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
title_full Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
title_fullStr Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
title_full_unstemmed Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
title_sort Trends and biases in global scientific literature about ecological niche models
author Vaz,U. L.
author_facet Vaz,U. L.
Cunha,H. F.
Nabout,J. C.
author_role author
author2 Cunha,H. F.
Nabout,J. C.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Vaz,U. L.
Cunha,H. F.
Nabout,J. C.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv scientometric
species distribution model
Maximum Entropy
topic scientometric
species distribution model
Maximum Entropy
description Abstract Recently, ecological niche models have been employed to investigate the potential geographical distribution of species. However, it is necessary to analyze the vast number of publications on this topic to understand the trends and biases of research using ecological niche models (ENMs). Therefore, this study aims to investigate trends in the scientific literature regarding studies on ENMs. For the quantitative analysis of the literature on ENMs, we performed a search in the Thomson ISI (Web of Science) database between 1991 and 2013. The search identified 3042 papers containing preselected keywords in either the title or abstract. The results showed that the number of papers has increased over the years (r=0.77, P<0.001), with a sharp increase in recent years, highlighting the widespread use of the ENMs. There was an increase in the diversity of journals that published papers about ENMs (r=0.97, P<0.001). The research was conducted in different countries, predominantly the United States of America (550 papers), and the most commonly used method was the Maximum Entropy method (312 papers). Regarding the taxonomic group, most research has been conducted on plants (402 papers, or 28.36% of the total). There was no relationship between the modeling method used and the taxonomic group studied (χ2=4.8, P=0.15). Finally, the wide availability of biological, environmental and computational resources has elicited the broad use of tools for ENMs. Despite the conceptual discussions of the ENMs, this method is currently the most effective way to evaluate the potential geographical distribution of species, and to predict the distribution under different environmental conditions (i.e., future or past scenarios).
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-11-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842015000800017
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842015000800017
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1519-6984.22713
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Internacional de Ecologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Internacional de Ecologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Biology v.75 n.4 suppl.1 2015
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Biology
instname:Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
instacron:IIE
instname_str Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
instacron_str IIE
institution IIE
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Biology
collection Brazilian Journal of Biology
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Biology - Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bjb@bjb.com.br||bjb@bjb.com.br
_version_ 1752129882042662912