[Taxacom] Fwd: Zootaxa taken off of JCR

Fri Jul 3 11:22:49 CDT 2020

  A bit of history may be interesting.

  1.- First, we call the attention in Nature on the effect of Citation  
Index to the study of Biodiversity: 

  Published: 17 February 2000. Nature 
  Valdecasas, A., Castroviejo, S. & Marcus, L. Reliance on the  
citation index undermines the study of biodiversity. Nature 403, 698  
(2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35001751

  2.- Later, Krell wrote that Impact factor are not relevant to  
taxonomy in the same journal:
  Published: 01 June 2000
  Krell, F. Impact factors aren't relevant to taxonomy. Nature 405,  
507–508 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35014664Frank-Thorsten Krell 

  3.- Later on Garfield answered Krell: 
  Published: 13 September 2001
  Garfield, E. Taxonomy is small, but it has its citation classics.  
Nature 413, 107 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/35093267

  It seems to me that any relation of Citation Index  with Taxonomy is  
being detrimental and, at times, offensive.

Antonio G Valdecasas

Doug Yanega via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> escribió:

> Some (many?) of you may have heard that some major taxonomic  
> journals, including Zootaxa and the International Journal of  
> Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, have just been removed  
> entirely from Impact Factor indexing, jeopardizing the future of  
> taxonomic research by penalizing taxonomists who choose and have  
> chosen to publish in these or other suppressed journals.
>
> For those who find this a significant concern, I am sharing below a  
> message from Frank-Thorsten Krell, a fellow ICZN Commissioner, which  
> gives some useful background and relevant links. I have the sense,  
> likely shared by others, that this may be a /fait accompli/, a  
> decision not subject to review or reversal, but *maybe* there are  
> some human beings involved in this decision who can be contacted and  
> persuaded to reconsider. Some of the information Frank presents  
> below may be helpful in making the case.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:         Zootaxa taken off of JCR
> Date:         Fri, 3 Jul 2020 05:33:35 +0000
> From:         Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
> To:         (recipient list suppressed)
>
> I have written about impact factor suppression six years ago:  
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270396659_Losing_the_numbers_game_abundant_journal_self-citations_put_journals_at_risk_for_a_life_without_Impact_Factor Abstract:  “To counteract impact factor manipulations by editors, in 2008 Thomson Reuters started suppressing journals with abundant self-citations and excluding them from the Journal Citation Reports® for two years. The number of banned journals rose from 9 in 2007 to 66 in 2012. Abundant journal self-citations can be due to the nature of the journal or unethical strategies of editors, such as coercive citations or citation cartels. Regardless of whether unethical behaviour was involved, journals with excessive self-citations are suppressed by Thomson Reuters. While unethical behaviour should be discouraged, depriving the accused journals of the benefit of the doubt can lead to unfair  
> treatment.”
>
> Now Zootaxa, but also the International Journal of Systematic and  
> Evolutionary Microbiology, the official journal of record for new  
> microbial taxa, fell into that trap.
>
> Yesterday I submitted a Correspondence to Nature about that (which  
> will be rejected in about 15 days – or not):
>
> “Impact Factor—Taxonomy cannot win
>
> Twenty years ago, I laid out why Impact Factors don’t work as  
> performance indicators for taxonomic research (Nature *405*,  
> 507–508; 2000; *415*, 957; 2002), referring to the lack of  
> core-journals as one of the reasons. While taxonomical publishing is  
> still extremely fragmented, more than most other fields, there are  
> examples of successful consolidation. One is /Zootaxa/, a  
> mega-journal that meanwhile publishes about 25% of all new  
> zoological species and other taxa (Z.-Q. Zhang, /Zootaxa/ *4000*,  
> 596–600; 2015). Another example is the /International Journal of  
> Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology/, the official journal of  
> record for new microbial taxa. According to the /International Code  
> of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes/, all new prokaryote names have to be  
> published or get validated in this one journal (C.T. Parker /et  
> al./, /Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microb./ *69*, S1–S111; 2019). Now  
> Clarivate Plc, the owner of the Journal Impact Factor, has revoked  
> the 2019 Impact Factors for both those and 31 other journals because  
> of their high rate of journal self-citations  
> (https://retractionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Title-Suppress-2.pdf). Revoking Journal Impact Factors has been a means to fight attempts of citation manipulations by journals since 2008 (F.-T. Krell, /Eur. Sci. Ed./ *40*, 36–38; 2014). However, in journals dominating a field or being a mandatory outlet, such high rates are expected and unavoidable, and not necessarily indicating a manipulative strategy. Depriving leading taxonomic journals of their Journal Impact Factors can have devastating effects on the evaluation of taxonomists and on taxonomy as a whole, as long as this metric is still used as a performance indicator for publishing  
> scientists.
>
> *Frank-T. Krell *Denver Museum of Nature & Science, Denver, USA.
>
> frank.krell at dmns.org <mailto:frank.krell at dmns.org>”[1]
>
> Here are the links to the referenced Nature correspondences:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12467244_Impact_factors_aren%27t_relevant_to_taxonomy https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11486254_Why_impact_factors_don%27t_work_for_taxonomy This action of Clarivate can have extremely negative consequences for taxonomists evaluated by Impact Factor-counters. It can have negative consequences for Zootaxa. It can even have negative consequences for taxonomy as a whole as one of the most prominent taxonomic outlets is now no longer an option for many academic taxonomists. Very bad and  
> annoying.
>
> I see little hope that academic administrators around the world will  
> suddenly become educated and understand the shortcomings of the  
> Journal Impact Factor. I would guess that the Impact Factor is here  
> to stay and will be senselessly applied to evaluate scientists. Oh,  
> I wrote about that, too:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267329241_The_Journal_Impact_Factor_as_a_performance_indicator This only for people who want to know more about the Impact Factor  
> game.
>
> We need to consider how taxonomy and success of taxonomists are  
> evaluated and measured in academia. Publications are key. For our  
> long term strategy, we need to avoid all unintended consequences  
> that further harm the taxonomic enterprise (additionally to lack of  
> funding, increasing, often lethal red tape, lack of career  
> opportunities for new blood, etc. etc.).
>
> Cheers
>
> Frank
>
> Dr. Frank-Thorsten Krell
>
> Senior Curator of Entomology, Editor-in-Chief
>
> Commissioner and Councillor, International Commission on Zoological  
> Nomenclature
>
> Department of Zoology
>
> Denver Museum of Nature & Science
>
> 2001 Colorado Blvd
>
> Denver, Colorado 80205-5798, U.S.A.
>
> Frank.krell at dmns.org <mailto:Frank.krell at dmns.org>
>
> Phone 303.370.8244
>
> Fax 303.331.6492
>
> https://www.dmns.org/science/zoology/staff/frank-krell/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:  
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:  
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:  
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.

Vínculos:
---------
[1] mailto:frank.krell at dmns.org>%E2%80%9D