Trends in biodiversity research over two decades: paradigmatic finders keepers?

Open access

Trends in biodiversity research over two decades: paradigmatic finders keepers?

Biodiversity research has been criticized for displaying the "founder effect" and not deviating in terms of study topic from the course set by its founding terrestrial ecologists more than three decades ago. I tested this hypothesis by examining over four thousand papers published between 1987 and 2008 in three international journals, Conservation Biology, Biological Conservation, and Biodiversity and Conservation. Analysis of temporal trends in types of organisms studied, types of ecosystems studied, types of methodologies used, and types of stresses investigated, revealed that there has been little movement away from the origins of the profession as being primarily concerned with the effects of forest habitat loss on charismatic terrestrial megafauna.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Bolen E. G. 1989. Conservation biology wildlife management and spaceship earth. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 17: 351-354.

  • Bunnell F. L. & Dupris L. A. 1994. Canadian-based literature: Implications to conservation and management. Ecoscience 1: 87-92.

  • Bunnell F. L. & Dupris L. A. 1995. Conservation Biology's literature revisited: Wine or vinaigrette? Wildl. Soc. Bull. 23: 56-62.

  • Caughley G. 1994. Directions in conservation biology. J. Animal. Ecol. 63: 215-244.

  • Clinchy M. & Krebs C. J. 1997. Viva Caughley! (a letter). Conserv. Biol. 11: 832-833.

  • Cooley J. & Golley F. 1984. Trends in ecological research in the 1980s. NATO Conf. Ser. Vol 7. Plenum Publ. Group New York.

  • Deshmukh I. 1989. On the limited role of biologists in biological conservation. Conserv. Biol. 3: 521-522.

  • Disney R. H. 1989. Does anyone care? Conserv. Biol. 4: 414.

  • Edwards T. C. 1989. The Wildlife Society and the Society for Conservation Biology: Strange but unwilling bedfellows. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 17: 340-343.

  • Ehrenfeld D. 1989. Is anyone listening? Conserv. Biol. 4: 414.

  • France R. 1998. Putting genes back into their lab bottles: Much ado about nothing? Conserv. Biol. 12: 500-501.

  • France R. 2001. Conservation biology: The newest tool in the biodiversity tool box. Biodiver. J. Life Earth. 2: 17-21.

  • France R. & Rigg C. 1998a. Survey of the global distribution of biodiversity research published in five international journals: Is there a tropical bias? Trop. Biodiver. 5: 161-166.

  • France R. & Rigg C. 1998b. Examination of the ‘founder effect’ in biodiversity research: patterns and imbalances in the published literature. Diver. Distrib. 4: 77-86.

  • France R. Peters R. & Rigg C. 1998. Comparative assessment of regional representation and research productivity of conservation biologists and applied ecologists. Ecoscience 5: 561-567.

  • Hedrick P. W. Lacy R. C. Allendorf F. W. & Soule M. E. 1996. Directions in conservation biology: Comments on Caughley. Conserv. Biol. 10: 1312-1320.

  • Irish K. E. & Norse E. A. 1996. Scant evidence on marine biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 10: 680.

  • Jensen M. N. & Krausman P. R. 1993. Conservation Biology's literature: New wine or just a new bottle? Wildl. Soc. Bull. 21: 199-203.

  • Kaufman L. 1988. Marine biodiversity research: The sleeping dragon. Conserv. Biol. 2: 307-308.

  • Miller L. N. & Levin S. A. 1994. Report of the Editors-in-Chief Ecology Ecological Monographs and Ecological Applications. Ecol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 75: 233-236.

  • Murphy D. G. 1989. Conservation and confusion: Wrong species wrong scale wrong conclusions. Conserv. Biol. 3: 203-204.

  • Noss R. F. 1989. Who will speak for biodiversity? Conserv. Biol. 3: 202-203.

  • Peters R. H. 1997. The ecology of science policy. Lake Reserv. Manag. 12: 407-419.

  • Peters R. H. Ball G. Carignan R. & Prepas E. 1996. An assessment of research in evolution and ecology supported by the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53: 670-680.

  • Redford K. H. Taber A. & Simonetti J. 1990. There is more to biodiversity than the tropical rain forests. Conserv. Biol. 3: 328-340.

  • Resh V. H. & Yamamoto D. 1994. International collaboration in freshwater ecology. Freshw. Biol. 32: 613-624.

  • Sen P. K. 1968. Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall's tau. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 63: 1379-1389.

  • Soule M. 1985. What is conservation biology? BioScience 35: 727-734.

  • Statzner B. Resh V. & Kobzina N. 1995. Scale effects on impact factors of scientific journals: Ecology compared to other fields. Oikos 72: 440-443.

  • Teer J. G. 1988. Conservation Biology. The science of scarcity. Book review. J. Wildl. Manag. 52: 570-572.

  • Terbough J. 1988. The big things that run the world - a sequel to E. O. Wilson. Conserv. Biol. 2: 402-403.

  • Thomas J. W. & Salwasser H. 1989. Bringing conservation biology into a position in natural resources management. Conserv. Biol. 3: 123-127.

  • Wardle D. A. 1995. Journal citation impact factors and parochial citation practices. Ecol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 76: 102-104.

  • Wilson E. O. 1987. The little things that rule the world (the importance and conservation of invertebrates). Conserv. Biol. 1: 344-346

  • Yahner R. H. 1990. Wildlife management and conservation biology revisited. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 18: 348-350.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 172 78 4
PDF Downloads 65 45 4