ccording
to a recent analysis of
Essential Science Indicators ,
Functional Plant Biology has achieved the highest
percent increase in total citations among journals in the
field of Plant & Animal Science. The journal’s current
record in this field includes 471 papers cited a total of
1,822 times to date. In the interview below, Functional
Plant Biology’s Managing Editor, Dr. Jennifer Henry,
talks about the journal’s history and citation achievements.
|
Did you expect Functional Plant
Biology to become highly cited, or is this surprising to you?
This is welcome news, and a long-hoped-for part of our overall
vision! Although citations are not our primary goal, they are crucial
for survival in today’s marketplace, where journal usage governs
which libraries maintain their subscription. Higher citations are a
by-product of our main goal (publishing exceptional science). This is
pleasing when authors have a choice of so many journals for
submission.
How would you account for the increased citation rate of Functional
Plant Biology?
|

“The upswing in the amount of molecular work in plant science research has helped lift our impact factor, as much of it increases our understanding of plant function, and so is a great fit with our scope, and tends to be cited reasonably fast.”
|
|
By way of background, we relaunched the journal in 2002 (from the Australian
Journal of Plant Physiology), partly to move away from the
misperception that this is "an Australian journal," and
partly to reflect our realigned focus. Plant science research in this
century is much broader that just "plant physiology" (which
conjures up images of bearded men measuring leaf length with a
ruler!), and now encompasses molecular biology, tissue culture, and
gene discovery. The focus of AjPP, and main criterion for
accepting papers, was always how the research increases our
understanding of plant function, so we decided to embody this in
the new title of the journal.
Around the time of the relaunch, we focused on attracting the best
science we could, through increased promotional efforts to attract
higher-quality submissions from a wide range of countries, and by
guidelines to our reviewers to be more critical. We also encouraged
top authors who usually published elsewhere to give us a go. Those
combined efforts have resulted in more and better manuscripts coming
our way, so consequently the citation rate has risen.
Was there a change in policy or editorial direction that might account
for this?
We acknowledged early on that we couldn’t necessarily compete
with "mega-publishers" or much larger journals (without a
massive impact factor or, being a not-for-profit publisher, a large
budget). I recognized that one thing we could offer was a
"boutique service," which is the beauty of the journal
having a full-time in-house scientifically trained Managing Editor
(rather than an academic Editor-in-Chief whose time is split wearing
several hats). I work hard to offer rapid turnaround (within five
weeks) and friendly, personalised service (particularly when rejecting
a manuscript). The upside (for authors) of our stringent budget is
that there are no page charges in FPB, and (for subscribers)
the fact that our subscription price is relatively low.
The journal committee and I remain open-minded to considering
left-field viewpoint articles that may not be in the scope of (or
considered by) more conservative journals. We have expanded our scope
to include methodological papers, which feature on our "Most Read
Papers" list (such as Jodie Dunn’s "Comparison
of solvent regimes for the extraction of photosynthetic pigments from
leaves of higher plants"1)
and we invite review articles from top authors in the field (such as
Manuela Chaves’ "Understanding
plant responses to drought - from genes to the whole plant").
See related link
#1 below.
What historical factors have contributed to the success of Functional
Plant Biology?
Australia has long had a strong plant physiology research community
with excellent links with major international players. Since its
inception in 1974, AjPP has been well respected and supported
by many key plant physiologists in the ‘70s and ‘80s. That support
continues through close links with the Australian Society of Plant
Scientists and the New Zealand Society of Plant Physiologists,
for whom we sponsor several awards for early-career researchers. We
are supported by a progressive publishing house (CSIRO
PUBLISHING), which strives to
stay at the forefront of publishing technology, so we stay abreast
with online submission, fast Web publishing, and international market
penetration.
Have there been specific developments in the fields served by Functional
Plant Biology that may have contributed?
The upswing in the amount of molecular work in plant science
research has helped lift our impact factor, as much of it increases
our understanding of plant function, and so is a great fit with our
scope, and tends to be cited reasonably fast. I don’t dare to claim
that we have brought about any great change in the direction of
research, but I do hope that we have facilitated discussion through
exposure of people’s research, particularly in more niche areas such
as CAM and ecophysiology, through our regularly publishing Special
Issues on these topics, particularly from conferences.
What, in your view, is this journal’s main significance or
contribution in the field of Plant & Animal Science?
We focus on high-quality biochemical, physiological, and molecular
studies of plant function, and, as mentioned earlier, remain
open-minded to a range of viewpoints. We also support early-career
researchers (less than 10 years post-Ph.D.) by awarding the "FPB
Best Paper" prize and sponsoring the Peter Goldacre award each
year. Many past winners of the Goldacre are now big names in plant
physiology (Barry Osmond, Andrew Smith, Graham Farquhar, Joe Wolfe,
Geoff McFadden, and Harvey Millar). Since 2005, we offer Rapid
Communication for work that is particularly exciting and should be
published fast (such as Stan Roberts’ "Metabolic
engineering of Arabidopsis
to produce nutritionally important DHA in seed oil"2).
See related link
#2 below.
How do you see your field(s) evolving in the next few years?
I have already seen really exciting research coming out of
inter-faculty tearoom discussions! There is great potential for
discoveries through increased collaboration across disciplines (e.g.
biomedical + plant science, physics + cell biology).
What role do you see for your journal?
All journals offer the value-adding service of peer-review, and I
believe that these reviewers are the lifeblood of any journal, and
deserve to be kept in the loop about that manuscript. Therefore, I
look after the reviewers by sending them the other reviewer’s
report, letting them know the final outcome, and sending them a
reprint upon publication. We also aim to provide a forum for effective
communication of advances in plant sciences, and may in future host
online discussions. We offer wider media exposure through articles in
magazines such as the New Scientist to highlight research with
an application of interest to the general public.
| Functional Plant Biology's
most-cited paper with 42 cites to date: |
|
Chaves MM, Maroco JP, Pereira JS, "Understanding plant responses to drought - from genes to the whole plant,"
Funct. Plant Biol. 30(3): 239-64, 2003. |
|
Source:
Essential Science Indicators |
|
|