Eurasian Spoonbills (Platalea leucorodia) in the Gandoman Wetlands. Photo by Ruhollah Asgari
The newly published articles focus on supporting the sustainable management of the Danube Delta, including an assessment of the impact of pesticide residues on the river and some insights on the potential of earth observation data for monitoring the Delta. The journal also publishes research on the ecology and biogeography of wetland ecosystems in general, such as a study on the habitat and behaviour of the Eurasian Spoonbill (Platalea leucorodia).
Established in 1993, the journal offers a multidisciplinary platform for studies in the fields of ecology, biodiversity, environmental protection, hydrology, ichthyology, ornithology, limnology, and sustainable development related to wetlands and deltaic environments. It is free to publish and open for submissions.
“With the launch of the first articles in Volume 30 of the Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute, now published with Pensoft, we celebrate an important milestone in advancing research on biodiversity, aquatic ecology, and data integration,” said the journal’s Editor-in-Chief Iuliana-MihaelaTudor of the Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development.
“This new stage reflects not only the scientific value of the contributions, but also the collaborative spirit that strengthens our community and drives innovation forward.
“As Louis Pasteur once said, ‘Science knows no country, because knowledge belongs to humanity, and is the torch which illuminates the world.’
“We warmly invite our readers, authors, and collaborators to explore this volume, to share in the exchange of ideas, and to continue building together a future where open science connects and empowers us all.”
“What makes a paper successful?” is something authors would like to know when submitting a manuscript and editors when deciding on the acceptance of papers.
One answer is: “Write an exciting paper on a relevant topic with up-to-date methods”.
While this is certainly true, most authors feel that this is not the whole truth. The enormous efforts some authors invest in getting their paper accepted in a “high-rank” journal reflect the belief that the publication venue influences the scientific impact of a paper. Other authors spend quite some time in finding a “fancy” title for their contribution.
But do such “formal” aspects actually influence the impact of articles and, if so, to which degree and which are the most relevant ones?
Astonishingly, there is very little published evidence on these aspects.
Thus, I conducted an empirical study using my own publication output over the years. With almost 200 papers in over 50 indexed journals, it already allows some generalisations. With the three IAVS journals,Journal of Vegetation Science, Applied Vegetation Science and Vegetation Classification and Survey, being among the preferred outlets, the journal portfolio is probably also quite similar to that of other IAVS members.
As a common currency for citation impact, I used the Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI), provided by the Scopus database. While the absolute number of citations is not suitable for a meaningful comparison between papers as the number of citations always increases with time since publication, FWCI standardised citations compared to all articles published in the same year in the same subject field and as the same article type (e.g. research article vs. review article).
A FWCI of 1 means that an article is cited as much as the average, a FWCI of 2 refers to twice as many citations as an average article, etc. Scopus also provides a corresponding measure to FWCI at the journal level, namely the Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), which essentially is the mean of the FWCI values of all papers in that journal in the respective period.
According to the multiple regression analysis, journal impact (SNIP) was the strongest predictor of the article impact.
However, alone it explained only 26.8% of the variance while other formal parameters together explained 31.5% of the variance.
Among those, the brevity of the title was most influential. Each word less in the title led to 9% more citations.
Further, both article length and author numberhad a positive influenceon citations.
Publishing in a special featureincreased the citation rate by 43%.
By contrast, open access or formulating titles as questions or factual statements did not significantly influence citation rates.
In conclusion, selecting a high-impact journal has less influence on the article impact than many people believe – the citation impact of different articles in one journal typically varies more than the mean citation impact between different journals.
For authors, the easiest way to increase the impact of a given article is to shorten the title as much as possible.
Caption: Variation of the Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) values of articles in journals represented by at least five articles in the analysed sample, with box height proportional to the number of included papers. All three IAVS journals were well represented. The variation of citation impact within individual journals was very large (note the log-scale of the x-axis). For example, the best cited articles of the author in JVS, AVS and VCS all had a considerably better citation performance than the single Nature paper co-authored by the author (FWCI = 3.70).
