The paper is a bibliometric study of the publication and citation patterns and impact of South African research 1981–2000 in five selected research fields: Animal & Plant sciences; Chemistry; Biochemistry; Microbiology & molecular biology, including genetics; and Physics, excluding Space science. Data are collected from Science Citation Index via the ISI product National Science Indicators. With the exception of Microbiology & molecular biology and Physics the results demonstrate a decrease of SA publications from 1986–1990. The SA world share declines for all five fields. First from the period 1994–1998 the Animal & plant sciences and Microbiology & molecular biology turn the decline into an increase. Absolute citation impact is increasing for all the fields from 1989–1993, except for Chemistry. One reason for the decline is a lower publication output. General & internal medicine, as an supplementary volume-heavy field observed, declines in citations until that same period from which it becomes stable, also in impact, but with a marked decrease in cited paper proportion. In citation world shares the five fields combined show positive signs also since 1989–1993, after which period the international eco-political embargo of SA was lifted. However, Biochemistry and Chemistry continue to decline during the 1990s. Citation impact relative to the world shows a similar pattern, but stagnation appears towards the end of the 1990s in all the observed fields combined. The trends are quite similar to those of Mexico and New Zealand. It is thus highly uncertain if a general citation embargo of SA occurred; yet, in some fields like the Animal & plant sciences, Veterinary science, Chemistry, and General & internal medicine there are signs that a mild citation embargo might have occurred. However, the economic embargo, combined with a significant brain drain, may have had an effect on the publication productivity, after it was lifted. For all indicators Chemistry is undergoing a marked decline during the last decade. This is in line with the negative trends for General & internal medicine, whereas some other medical specialities, biology, economics and other social sciences, the engineering fields and materials sciences keep stable or increase their production. SA is in line with the Mexican development but below that of New Zealand, seemingly losing ground to the developed countries.
coming decades, which are likely to see global ecological as well as political imbalances and reconfigurations.
Although traditionally there has been various research and development (R&D) components linked with plant production, animal husbandry
Appendix 2: Fields and subfields
The subfields of the major fields of section 4 are given in the following: Agricultural sciences: Agronomy/crop science; Animal breeding/genetics; Animal husbandry; Animal nutrition; Animal sciences nec;
Authors:Peter A. Schulz and Edmilson J. T. Manganote
clinical medicine, chemistry, physics and plant and animal sciences as dominant fields. Besides that, it is noticeable the relative high importance of agricultural sciences, reaching up to 4% of the total output in Brazil. We consider here only the most
these indicators for science funding decisions have been reported (Evidence Ltd. 2007 ; Lawrence 2003 ). Similar to certain animals trying to escape their predators or seeking out prey (e.g. through assimilating their appearance to the environment
, mathematics, microbiology, molecular biology and genetics, neuroscience and behavior, pharmacology and toxicology, physics, plants and animal science, psychiatry/psychology, social sciences (general), and space science.
Within each region, each
years, together with Neuroscience & Behaviour ( Fig. 2 ). A relatively stable (no-growth) trend was apparent in Geosciences and Plant and Animal Sciences, but in most cases the frequency of positive results was increasing. In eight disciplines, the trend
Authors:Stanislaw Kosecki, Robbin Shoemaker, and Charlotte Kirk Baer
USDA science addresses a wide range of issues; most of the USDA efforts are focused in life sciences (>80%) and within that the largest share is focused on animal and plant production systems. Social sciences make up a much smaller proportion of USDA