Search

Synthesis has become ubiquitous in ecology. Despite its widespread application to a broad range of research topics, it remains unclear how synthesis has affected the discipline. Using a case study of publications (n = 2304) from the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis compared with papers with similar keywords from the Web of Science (n = 320,000), we address several questions about the comparative impact of synthesis, the role of synthesis in driving key research themes, and whether synthesis is focused on different topics than is the broader ecological literature. We found much higher citation rates for synthesis papers overall (fivefold more) and within eleven key topic themes (e.g. species richness, biodiversity, climate change, global change). Synthesis papers often played key roles in driving, redirecting, or resolving core questions and exhibited much greater cross-theme connectivity. Together, these results indicate that synthesis in science has played a crucial role in accelerating and advancing ecological knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This white paper was developed by the Infrastructure for Biology at Regional to Continental Scales Working Group (IBRCS Working Group) as part of an American Institute of Biological Science's IBRCS [...]

According to a recent survey, ecologists and evolutionary biologists feel that theoretical and empirical research should coexist in a tight feedback loop but believe that the two domains actually interact very little. We evaluate this perception using a citation network analysis for two data sets, representing the literature on sexual selection and speciation. Overall, 54%–60% of citations come from a paper's own category, whereas 17%–23% are citations across categories. These cross-citations tend to focus on highly cited papers, and we observe a positive correlation between the numbers of citations a study receives within and across categories. We find evidence that reviews can function as integrators between the two literatures, argue that theoretical models are analogous to specific empirical study systems, and complement our analyses by studying a cocitation network. We conclude that theoretical and empirical research are more tightly connected than generally thought but that avenues exist to further increase this integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is somewhat daunting to write a review of a handbook on scientific writing. A reasonable assumption might be that, if the handbook was well written, anyone reading it carefully [...]

Four billion years of adaptation to Earth's physical environment, and to its increasingly complex biotic environment, have produced the stunning diversity of organisms with which we cohabit this small blue [...]

Lynne D. Houck and Lee C. Drickamer, eds. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996. 860 pp., illus. $95.00 (ISBN 0-22635456-3 cloth), $34.95 (ISBN 0-22635457-1 paper). Foundations of Animal Behavior [...]