Search

Plagiochila is the most diverse genus of liverwort by number of described species, with 1600 validly published names. The typification and application of names within the context of such nomenclatural diversity is therefore critical. Typification statements made over five decades of revisionary study for 95 validly published species names, and two varieties, in Australasian Plagiochilaceae are reviewed with reference to the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Code) and the citation of original material in the protologue, to establish for each the type specimens and their status. This review serves two purposes, firstly to confirm type specimen status given the recent suggestion that type citations by Bonner in Index Hepaticarum Volume 1 not be accepted as effective (if inadvertent) lectotypifications; and secondly to provide a data-based assessment of typification practice with reference to a relatively well-studied bryophyte group. None of the works reviewed were error-free with regards to typification practice. The most common errors were the citation of a holotype when none exists, and neglecting earlier type citation statements and their context. However, no instance where these errors impacted the application of names was found, implying authors are generally conscientious in their identification of original material. Three recommendations to improve typification practice are made: firstly, taxonomists need to utilise available online biodiversity resources to establish for themselves the original material and its context; secondly, greater scrutiny of type statements in existing primary and secondary literature is required; and thirdly, we need proactive education and self-education in the Code's requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research aims to investigate whether multi/inter-disciplinary research activities are related to research impact and publication counts of scholars. Since researchers with very high levels of multi/inter-disciplinarity might be able to target complex problems, we would expect them to receive more credits than their colleagues with a stronger disciplinary orientation. We analysed Web of Science (WoS) indexed publications of all associate and full professors from a random sample of Australian universities in physics, chemistry and biology (1980–2014). Australian Fields of Research (FoR) codes assigned to journals were used to calculate the diversification of authors' publications. The number of citations in the first 3 years, number of 10% most frequently cited papers, and citation impact percentile were used for impact assessment. A few indicators were used to measure the diversity including 'extent of diversification (ED)' (number of distinct FoR codes divided by the number of publications) and 'diversification ratio (DR)' (ratio of the publications falling outside the dominant code to the total number of publications). A total of 47.76% of biologists' publications, 35.23% of physicists' publications and 20.36% of chemists' publications were published in journals assigned to fields other than the Australian associate and full professors' fields. Publications from biologists had the largest values of diversification. Women (compared with men) and associate professors (compared with full professors) in chemistry, biology and overall were more probably to publish diversely. ED was negatively correlated with output and citation impact. DR also had a negative but weak correlation with the number of publications and 10% most frequently cited paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study has examined fog computing global research output, as indexed in Scopus database during 2012-18 on a series of bibliometric measures, such as publications growth rate, global publications share, citation impact, the share of international collaborative papers, distribution of publications by broad subjects. In addition, the study discusses the citation profile of top organizations and authors in fog computing, and the preferred media for research communication and characteristics of highly cited papers. The study finds 1711 global research output registered (68.09%) annual growth rate. 81 countries participated in fog computing research, of which the top 10 countries accounted for 91.23% global publication share and more than 100% of global citation share during 2012-18. China and USA tops the list of top 10 most productive countries in fog computing research with 22.38% and 19.40% global publication share, followed by India (9.70%), Italy (7.36%), Australia (6.14%), etc. USA top the list (17.02% and 2.25%), followed by Australia (15.54% and 2.06%), UK (12.09% and 1.59%), Canada (11.03% and 1.46%), Spain (9.95% and 1.32%), etc. in terms of citation impact per paper and relative citation index. 401 organizations and 457 authors participated in global fog computing research, of which the top 10 organizations and authors contributed (15.02% and 7.48%) global publication share and (42.17% and 12.81%) global citations share during 2012-18. The world contributed (59.75%) share of output in fog computing research in top 20 most productive journals, and 19 of its papers have been rated as highly cited papers each with 100 to 1657 citations per paper, averaging 209.79 citations per paper [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]