Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Conceptual Map of Conservation Paleobiology: Visualizing a Discipline

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Marine Conservation Paleobiology

Part of the book series: Topics in Geobiology ((TGBI,volume 47))

Abstract

Disciplinary boundaries frame the basic questions and central issues of research, providing the context for the evolution of prevailing theories or paradigm shifts. This chapter aims to outline the development and scope of conservation paleobiology using bibliometrics. Publication records relating to research on conservation paleobiology were downloaded from Web of Science to generate two datasets, one aimed at producing a more conservative representation of conservation paleobiology, and the other more expansive. Bibliographic maps were created to provide insight into the development and structure of the discipline for both characterizations of conservation paleobiology research (conservative versus expansive). Bibliographic maps indicated that individual researchers working on conservation paleobiology specialize in several fields. Regardless of how conservation paleobiology is defined, research involving both paleontology and conservation appears to be highly multidisciplinary, including at least three main research domains broadly categorized as: (1) environmental history and conservation archeobiology, (2) genetics and evolutionary biology, and (3) ecology. Furthermore, paleontological publications did not form a distinct cluster, but rather were integrated within conservation science. This supports the proposition that, in practice, conservation paleobiology is a field of study within conservation science, and not a sub-discipline within paleontology. Analyses also revealed emerging research fronts in several topics and confirmed the need for long-term data that pre-dates human activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Authors ordered by number of citations, from highest to lowest: S. T. Jackson, D. R. Foster, K. J. Willis, C. Saiz-Jimenez, J. M. Gonzalez, M. C. Portillo, J. C. Svenning, V. Rull, J. Salse, T. Vegas-Vilarrubia, G. P. Dietl, E. Montoya, J. M. Pandolfi, and J. L. McGuire.

References

  • Birnbaum PH (1981) Contingencies for interdisciplinary research: matching research questions with research organizations. Manage Sci 27:1279–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyack KW, Klavans R (2010) Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61:2389–2404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callon M, Courtial J-P, Turner WA, Bauin S (1983) From translations to problematic networks: an introduction to co-word analysis. Soc Sci Inf 22:191–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang Y-W, Huang M-H, Lin C-W (2015) Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics 105:2071–2087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane D (1972) Invisible colleges: diffusion of knowledge in scientific communication. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietl G (2016) Brave new world of conservation paleobiology. Front Ecol Evol 4:21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietl GP, Flessa KW (2011) Conservation paleobiology: putting the dead to work. Trends Ecol Evol 26:30–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietl GP, Flessa KW (2018) Should conservation paleobiologists save the world on their own time? In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 11–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietl GP, Kidwell SM, Brenner M et al (2011) Conservation paleobiology: opportunities for earth science. Ithaca, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietl GP, Kidwell SM, Brenner M et al (2015) Conservation paleobiology: leveraging knowledge of the past to inform conservation and restoration. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 43:79–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eom S (2008) All author cocitation analysis and first author cocitation analysis: a comparative empirical investigation. J Informetr 2:53–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fordham DA, Akçakaya HR, Alroy J et al (2016) Predicting and mitigating future biodiversity loss using long-term ecological proxies. Nat Clim Chang 6:909–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield E, Pudovkin AI, Istomin VS (2003) Why do we need algorithmic historiography? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 54:400–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gmür M (2003) Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: a methodological evaluation. Scientometrics 57:27–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Have RP, Rubalcaba L (2016) Social innovation research: an emerging area of innovation studies? Res Policy 45:1923–1935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler MM (1963) Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. Am Doc 14:10–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein JT, Porter AL (1990) Preconditions for interdisciplinary research. In: Birnbaum-More PH, Rossini FA, Baldwin DR (eds) International research of management: studies in interdisciplinary methods from business, government, and academia. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 11–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusnerik KM, Lockwood R, Grant AN (2018) Using the fossil record to establish a baseline and recommendations for oyster mitigation in the mid-Atlantic U.S. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 75–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff L, Rafols I (2012) Interactive overlays: a new method for generating global journal maps from web-of-science data. J Inf Secur 6:318–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievrouw LA (1989) The invisible college reconsidered. Commun Res 16:615–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshakova IV (1973) System of document connections based on references Sci Technical Inf Ser. VINITI 3–8

    Google Scholar 

  • McCain KW (1990) Mapping authors in intellectual space: a technical overview. J Am Soc Inf Sci 41:433–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meine C, Soule M, Noss RF (2006) “A mission-driven discipline”: the growth of conservation biology. Conserv Biol 20:631–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin G, Persson O (1996) Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics 36:363–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin G, Persson O (1998) Hotel cosmopolitan: a bibliometric study of collaboration at some European universities. J Am Soc Inf Sci 49:43–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody J (2004) The structure of a social science collaboration network: disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. Am Sociol Rev 69:213–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noss R (1999) Is there a special conservation biology? Ecography (Cop) 22:113–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raasch C, Lee V, Spaeth S, Herstatt C (2013) The rise and fall of interdisciplinary research: the case of open source innovation. Res Policy 42:1138–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafols I, Leydesdorff L (2009) Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60:1823–1835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramos-Rodríguez A-R, Ruíz-Navarro J (2004) Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: a bibliometric study of the strategic management journal, 1980–2000. Strateg Manag J 25:981–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roopnarine PD, Dineen AA (2018) Coral reefs in crisis: the reliability of deep-time food web reconstructions as analogs for the present. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 105–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Savarese M (2018) Effectively connecting conservation paleobiological research to environmental management: examples from Greater Everglades' restoration of southwest Florida. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 55–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider CL (2018) Marine refugia, past, present, and future: lessons from ancient geologic crises for modern marine ecosystem conservation. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 161–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Small H (1973) Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. J Am Soc Inf Sci 24:265–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small HG (1977) A co-citation model of a scientific specialty: a longitudinal study of collagen research. Soc Stud Sci 7:139–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small H, Boyack KW, Klavans R (2014) Identifying emerging topics in science and technology. Res Policy 43:1450–1467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JA, Durham SR, Dietl GP (2018) Conceptions of long-term data among marine conservation biologists and what conservation paleobiologists need to know. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 23–54

    Google Scholar 

  • de Solla Price DJ (1965) Networks of scientific papers. Science 149(3683):510–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soule ME (1985) What is conservation biology? Bioscience 35:727–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torraco RJ (2005) Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples. Hum Resour Dev Rev 4:356–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler CL, Schneider CL (2018) An overview of conservation paleobiology. In: Tyler CL, Schneider CL (eds) Marine conservation paleobiology. Springer, Cham, pp 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Besselaar P, Heimeriks G (2006) Mapping research topics using word-reference co-occurrences: a method and an exploratory case study. Budapest Sci 68:377–393

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84:523–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2014) Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Ding Y, Rousseau R, Wolfram D (eds) Measuring scholarly impact: methods and practice. Springer, New York, pp 285–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eck NJ, Waltman L, Dekker R, van den Berg J (2010) A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: multidimensional scaling and VOS. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 61:2405–2416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White HD, Griffith BC (1981) Author cocitation: a literature measure of intellectual structure. J Am Soc Inf Sci 32:163–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White HD, McCain KW (1998) Visualizing a discipline: an author co-citation analysis of information science. J Am Soc Inf Sci 49:327–355

    Google Scholar 

  • White HD, Wellman B, Nazer N (2004) Does citation reflect social structure? Longitudinal evidence from the “Globenet” interdisciplinary research group. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 55:111–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis KJ, Bailey RM, Bhagwat SA, Birks HJB (2010) Biodiversity baselines, thresholds and resilience: testing predictions and assumptions using palaeoecological data. Trends Ecol Evol 25:583–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan E, Ding Y (2012) Scholarly network similarities: how bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63:1313–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thank you to Chris Schneider and Lindsey Leighton for reviewing this manuscript, and to Anthony Giuffre for thoughtful discussions, which helped shape this contribution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geology and Environmental Earth Science, Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA

    Carrie L. Tyler

Authors
  1. Carrie L. Tyler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carrie L. Tyler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geology and Environmental Earth Science, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, USA

    Carrie L. Tyler

  2. Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Chris L. Schneider

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tyler, C.L. (2018). A Conceptual Map of Conservation Paleobiology: Visualizing a Discipline. In: Tyler, C., Schneider, C. (eds) Marine Conservation Paleobiology. Topics in Geobiology, vol 47. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73795-9_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation