Mapping the research publication trends among ICAR-Animal Sciences Research Institutes in India: Web of Science-based scientometric study

P KRISHNAN; M HEMALATHA; SUREKHA AGARWAL; P GIREESH-BABU; B M NAVEENA; CH SRINIVASA RAO

doi:10.56093/ijans.v93i9.115679

Authors

P KRISHNAN ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
M HEMALATHA ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
SUREKHA AGARWAL ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
P GIREESH-BABU ICAR-National Research Centre on Meat, Chengicherla, Hyderabad, Telangana
B M NAVEENA ICAR-National Research Centre on Meat, Chengicherla, Hyderabad, Telangana
CH SRINIVASA RAO ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v93i9.115679

Keywords:

Animal science, Citations, ICAR, Publication analysis, Relative growth rate

Abstract

In the current study we have undertaken the scientometric analysis to map research publications from 19 different animal science research institutions under the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), for a period of two decades (1998 to 2020), using the Web of Science (WoS) platform of Clarivate Analytics. We analyzed different scientometric parameters like year-wise citation records, institute-wise publication output, authorship pattern, publication types, top collaborating countries, research areas and journals, and relative growth rate and doubling time. Current analysis revealed that the maximum number of research articles were published in 2017 and ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute contributed to the highest number of research papers and citations during the
study period. Multi-authorship papers were significantly higher than single and double-authored papers. The study showed that in the field of animal sciences, the USA is the top collaborator with India resulting in 417 collaborative research papers. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences carried the maximum number of research papers published by researchers from ICAR-Animal Science Research Institutes (ASRI) during 1998-2020. Relative Growth Rate (RGR) showed a decreasing trend in research publications while the doubling time increased during this period. The paper provides a comprehensive account of the research trends in animal sciences research and also insights for strengthening research focus in India.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aksnes D W and Browman H I. 2015. An overview of global research effort in fisheries science. ICES Journal of Marine Science 73(4): 1004–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv248

Anandhali G and Achha L. 2018. Research trend and productivity in the field of mechatronics: A scientometric study. International Journal of Current Research 10(11): 75789–94.

Baldock C, Ruimin M S and Colin G. 2009. The h-index is the best measure of a scientist’s research productivity. Medical Physics 36(4): 1043–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3089421

Britt J, Aberle E, Esbenshade K and Males J. 2008. Invited Review: Animal science departments of the future. Journal of Animal Science 86: 3235–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1015

Bhoomaiah D, Krishnan P, Kantharajan G, Rajendran K V, Ponniah A G and Ch. Srinivasa Rao. 2020a. Scientometric assessment of research publications from fisheries institutes under Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) during 2009-2018. Indian Journal of Fisheries 67(4): 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21077/ijf.2020.67.4.107384-01

Bhoomaiah D, Krishnan P, Kantharajan G, Sangeeta B and Rajendran K V. 2020b. A scientometric assessment of research on white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) in India vis-a-vis the world (1998–2017). Aquaculture 520: 734672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.734672

Carpenter C R, Cone D C and Sarli C C. 2014. Using publication metrics to highlight academic productivity and research impact. Academic Emergency Medicine 21(10): 1160–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12482

Costas R and van Leeuwen T N. 2012. Approaching the reward triangle: General analysis of the presence of funding acknowledgements and peer interactive communication in scientific publications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(8): 1647–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22692

Eck N K and Waltman L. 2020. VOS viewer version 1.6.14. Manual for VOS viewer version 1 .6.14. University Leiden https://www.vosviewer.com/

Fanelli D and Lariviere V. 2016. Researchers’ individual publication rate has not increased in a century. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0149504. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149504

Garg K C, Kumar S and Lal K. 2006. Scientometric profile of Indian agricultural research as seen through Science Citation Index Expanded. Scientometrics 68(1): 151–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0088-y

Gazni A, Sugimoto C R and Didegah F. 2012. Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, Institutions, and countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 63(2): 323–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21688

Gupta B M, Bala A and Kshitig A. 2013. S&T publication output of India: A scientometric analysis of publications output, 1996-2011. Library Philosophy and Practice 921.

Hayati Z and Didegah F. 2010. International scientific collaboration among Iranian researchers during 1998-2007. Library Hi Tech 28(3): 433–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831011076675

Hirsch J E. 2005. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America 102(46): 16569–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102

Jirotka M, Lee C P and Olson G M. 2013. Supporting scientific collaboration: Methods, tools, and concepts. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 22(4–6): 667–715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-012-9184-0

Katz J S and Martin. 1997. What is research collaboration? Research Policy 26(1): 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1

Katz J S and Hicks D. 1997. How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics 40: 541–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02459299

Krishnan P, Praharaj C S, Kantharajan G, Bhoomaiah D, Sekar I, Soam S K and Rao C S. 2021. A scientometric analysis of research on pulses in India during 2000–2017. Agricultural Research 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-021-00595-3

Lee S and Bozeman B. 2005. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 35(5): 673–702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359

Li Z and Ho Y S. 2008. Use of citation per publication as an indicator to evaluate contingent valuation research. Scientometrics 75(1): 97–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1838-1

Mahapatra M. 1985. On the validity of the theory of exponential growth of scientific literature. Proceedings of the 15th IASLIC Conference, pp. 61-70.

Marmolejo-Leyva R, Perez-Angon M A and Russell J M. 2015. Mobility and international collaboration: Case of the Mexican Scientific Diaspora. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0126720. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126720

Nalimov V V and Mulchenko Z M. 1971. Scientometrics-Studying Science as an Information Process. US Air Force Systems Command, Foreign Technology Division, Washington DC.

Nicola G, Daniele R, Joshua M, Frédérique B and Michael H. 2016. Funding Data from Publication Acknowledgments: Coverage, Uses, and Limitations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23737

Oliveira Junior J G C, Silva L P S, Malhado A C M, Batista V S, Fabre N N and Ladle R J. 2016. Artisanal fisheries research: A need for globalization? PLoS ONE 11(3): e0150689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150689

Perianes-Rodriguez A, Waltman L and Eck N J V. 2016. Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics 10(4): 1178–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006

Peter A and Devi B. 2018. Scientometric sketch of Indian agriculture literature. Knowledge Librarian 5(2): 132–38.

Price D J D. 1965. Networks of scientific papers. Science 149(3683): 510–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510

Qi M, Zeng A, Li M, Fan Y and Di Z. 2017. Standing on the shoulders of giants: The effect of outstanding scientists on young collaborators’ careers. Scientometrics 111(3): 1839–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2328-8

Rathinasabapathy G and Kopperundevi S. 2020. Publication Productivity of Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (TANUVAS) during 1999–2018: A Scientometric view based on Web of Science. Indian Journal of Information, Library & Society 33: 59–73.

Schmoch U. 2005. The technological output of scientific Institutions, pp. 717–732. Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research. (Eds) Moed H, Glänzel W and Schmoch U. Dordrecht, Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_33

Thorsteinsdottir H. Public-sector research in small countries: Does size matter? Science and Public Policy 27(6): 433–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3152/147154300781781715

Vinitha K, Kumaresan R and Kannan K. 2018. Twenty-five years of fisheries research in India based on Web of Science. Proceedings of the International Conference on Exploring the horizons of Library and Information Sciences: From Libraries to knowledge hub. pp. 396-403. 7-9th August 2018. Indian Statistical Institute, Bangalore, India

Wagner C S and Leydesdorff L. 2005. Mapping the network of global science: Comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation 1(2): 185–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTG.2005.007050

Wang W, Yu S, Bekele T M, Kong X and Xia F. 2017. Scientific collaboration patterns vary with scholars’ academic ages. Scientometrics 112(1): 329–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2388-9