Networking and integration served within a partnership approach and covered with a delicious sauce of free and open access to data and information is MarBEF’s main dish, and it is this recipe that has helped MarBEF to successfully bring marine biodiversity research to a European level. Numerous meetings, workshops, training courses and Responsive Mode Projects (RMPs) have brought together many scientists. This integration has created endless new possibilities for new initiatives – the MarBEF Publication Series and the MarBEF Open Archive, to mention just two. So, is this having any effect on the way we publish as a network today

Appeltans, Ward

Haspeslagh, Jan

Vanden Berghe, Edward

English

Aquatic Commons

16 MarBEF Newsletter Autumn 2006
MarBEF Progress
By Ward Appeltans, Jan Haspeslagh and Edward Vanden Berghe
The general assembly in Lecce (May 2006)
unanimously voted to agree to the creation of
a MarBEF Open Archive (MOA) (see
http://www.marbef.org/moa or Appeltans et al
(2005) for an introduction to open archives).
MOA contains the digital version of published
works that are held within the MarBEF
Publication Series (MPS) (i.e. any class of
publication where at least one author is a
network member and in which MarBEF is
acknowledged). In addition, those papers
where MarBEF has b(r?)ought unrestricted
'Open Access' are automatically part of this
archive.
MOA acts as a central archive for any MarBEF
publication, so not only high-ranked scientific
articles but also grey documents which are
often hard to trace, are captured and made
available online. At the moment, MOA holds
174 publications, the majority of which are
contributions from the MarBEF newsletter or
publications in books of abstracts and reports.
Besides these publications that fall outside any
copyright restricted format, MOA contains 55
articles that are published in peer-reviewed
academic journals and are now free to
download. MOA can only archive those
publications whose publishers agree on the
concept and principles of open digital archives
(hereafter called green publishers/journals). As
a consequence, 22 papers that were published
in non-green or white journals could not be
made available through MOA.
According to the SHERPA/RoMEO online
database, which provides a listing of publishers’
copyright conditions, 94% of all publishers
allow for self-archiving on the Web. When we
look at the MarBEF publication series it seems
that, at least in the field of Marine Biodiversity
and Ecology, white publishers (who do not
Networking and integration served within a partnership approach and covered
with a delicious sauce of free and open access to data and information is
MarBEF’s main dish, and it is this recipe that has helped MarBEF to successfully
bring marine biodiversity research to a European level. Numerous meetings,
workshops, training courses and Responsive Mode Projects (RMPs) have brought
together many scientists. This integration has created endless new possibilities
for new initiatives – the MarBEF Publication Series and the MarBEF Open
Archive, to mention just two. So, is this having any effect on the way we publish
as a network today?
allow self-archiving) still control an important
part of the higher impact journals. Since the
start of MarBEF, we have published in 35
different journals, of which only 69% were
green with a median impact factor of 1.358,
whereas the median impact factor was 2.718
for the white journals (based on Journal Impact
Factors of 2004).
Notwithstanding this difference, there is a clear
shift in our choice towards green journals. In
2005, only 42% of the papers, or 43% of the
journals in which we published, could be
archived in MOA, whereas in 2006 (the year
we started MOA), 89% of the papers or 81%
of the journals we published in, are green
(Table 1). When taking the impact factor into
account, more green papers may result in a
decrease in average impact. Even if journal
impact factors can be a measure of
performance at all, it would at least be fair to
calculate the total score of impact factors
gathered in an equal time-scale. The total
score in impact factors increased from 38.532
in 2004 to 114.858 in 2005 and reached
100.282 in September 2006. This means that,
although already more papers are published in
2006, there is not an increase in terms of the
cumulative impact factor. This could be
explained by our choice for green journals.
According to Laurence (2001), articles that
are freely available online are cited more than
articles that are not freely available. It would be
interesting to see if MOA could deliver an
increased citation impact.
Despite the open access movement, the
journal Marine Ecology Progress Series (MEPS),
also called the ‘Citation King,’ is still very
popular and counts for 13 articles, which is
17% of all our MarBEF papers. Only recently,
MEPS has allowed for authors and research
groups to buy open access for their papers.
The result is that four out of six MarBEF papers
published in MEPS of this year are freely
available in MOA.
It is important to note that, today, the
copyright of a paper almost always remains
with the publisher and that a publisher can
withdraw from any collaborative projects within
the Open Archive Initiative framework.
Nowadays, many publishers agree to change
this copyright, so in order to secure open
access to your paper, we suggest it is better to
ask for inclusion of the following clause in the
copyright form of your paper: ‘I hereby transfer
MarBEF publishing revisited
Table 1. Number of MarBEF papers
published in ‘green’ or ‘white’ journals.
2004 2005 2006
Green papers 3 11 41
White papers 2 15 5
Total papers 5 26 6
Green journals 3 7 17
White journals 2 9 4
Total journals 5 16 21
Fucus vesiculosus at low tide.
©
En
gl
is
h 
N
at
ur
e
17MarBEF NewsletterAutumn 2006
to [publisher or journal] all rights to sell or
lease the text (on paper and online) of my
paper [title]. I retain only the right to
distribute it free for scholarly/scientific
purposes, in particular the right to self-archive
it publicly online on the Web.’
Also worth mentioning is that it is not only
MOA that gives a better visibility to our
MarBEF papers. The European Ocean
Biogeographic Information System (EurOBIS)
systematically screens and captures all the
species distribution data and provides them
through an online interactive atlas. At the
moment, over 1,700 distribution records are
listed that way.
The number of MarBEF papers is increasing
each year, from five in 2004, to 26 in 2005
and already 46 in September 2006 (including
10 in press) (Table 1). It would be interesting
to check if the number of authors and MarBEF
partner institutes involved in a paper also
reflects the collaboration within the network.
The numbers in Tables 2 and 3 show that the
majority (54%) of all papers have only one to
three authors, and in 67% of all cases only one
MarBEF institute is involved, and in only 36%
of these papers was there a collaboration
outside MarBEF (data not included in table).
Overall, this means that the majority of MarBEF
papers are still written within a single institute
and within a small group of co-authors. On the
other hand, the number of MarBEF papers in
which more than one (even up to five) MarBEF
institutes are collaborating is increasing – from
six in 2005 to 14 in 2006. The sample we used
in this study is very small; we only counted
publications in peer-reviewed scientific
journals, but the more than 100 articles
published in MarBEF newsletters and reports
are also important and should not be
forgotten. We also didn’t compare the present
situation with times before MarBEF, so drawing
main conclusions or marking clear trends at
this stage might be premature. What we
learned is that now, after 2.5 years of MarBEF
and one year of responsive mode research
projects, the network is increasing in size and
more papers are being produced, both with a
partnership approach, and in a wiser way (i.e.
more freely accessible).
References
Appeltans, W; Haspeslagh, J; Vanden Berghe, E
(2005). Publish wisely or perish? An open
archive for MarBEF. MarBEF Newsletter 3: 13.
Lawrence, S, 2001. Free online availability
substantially increases a paper’s impact. Nature
Vol 411, 521.
SHERPA/RoMEO database – online at http://
www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php.
Table 3. Number of MarBEF papers in
relation to number of MarBEF institutes
involved.
Institutes 1 2 3 4 5
2004 3 0 1 1 0
2005 20 3 2 1 0
2006 22 11 2 0 1
Total papers 45 14 5 2 1
Table 2. Number of MarBEF papers in relation to number of authors.
Authors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 15 21
2004 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
2005 5 8 3 3 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0
2006 4 6 8 4 6 4 1 0 2 0 0 1
Total papers 10 14 12 7 9 8 1 1 2 1 1 1
Sampling for sediment samples on a site inspection. (© Crown
copyright 2006. Reproduced by permission of Cefas, Lowestoft.)
Ward Appeltans, Jan Haspeslagh,
Edward Vanden Berghe
MarBEF Data Management Office
i/o Flanders Marine Institute (VLIZ)
Email: info@marbef.org


MarBEF publishing revisited

Appeltans, W.

Haspeslagh, J.

Vanden Berghe, E.

Open Marine Archive

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

16 MarBEF Newsletter Autumn 2006MarBEF ProgressBy Ward Appeltans, Jan Haspeslagh and Edward Vanden BergheThe general assembly in Lecce (May 2006)unanimously voted to agree to the creation ofa MarBEF Open Archive (MOA) (seehttp://www.marbef.org/moa or Appeltans et al(2005) for an introduction to open archives).MOA contains the digital version of publishedworks that are held within the MarBEFPublication Series (MPS) (i.e. any class ofpublication where at least one author is anetwork member and in which MarBEF isacknowledged). In addition, those paperswhere MarBEF has b(r?)ought unrestricted'Open Access' are automatically part of thisarchive.MOA acts as a central archive for any MarBEFpublication, so not only high-ranked scientificarticles but also grey documents which areoften hard to trace, are captured and madeavailable online. At the moment, MOA holds174 publications, the majority of which arecontributions from the MarBEF newsletter orpublications in books of abstracts and reports.Besides these publications that fall outside anycopyright restricted format, MOA contains 55articles that are published in peer-reviewedacademic journals and are now free todownload. MOA can only archive thosepublications whose publishers agree on theconcept and principles of open digital archives(hereafter called green publishers/journals). Asa consequence, 22 papers that were publishedin non-green or white journals could not bemade available through MOA.According to the SHERPA/RoMEO onlinedatabase, which provides a listing of publishers’copyright conditions, 94% of all publishersallow for self-archiving on the Web. When welook at the MarBEF publication series it seemsthat, at least in the field of Marine Biodiversityand Ecology, white publishers (who do notNetworking and integration served within a partnership approach and coveredwith a delicious sauce of free and open access to data and information isMarBEF’s main dish, and it is this recipe that has helped MarBEF to successfullybring marine biodiversity research to a European level. Numerous meetings,workshops, training courses and Responsive Mode Projects (RMPs) have broughttogether many scientists. This integration has created endless new possibilitiesfor new initiatives – the MarBEF Publication Series and the MarBEF OpenArchive, to mention just two. So, is this having any effect on the way we publishas a network today?allow self-archiving) still control an importantpart of the higher impact journals. Since thestart of MarBEF, we have published in 35different journals, of which only 69% weregreen with a median impact factor of 1.358,whereas the median impact factor was 2.718for the white journals (based on Journal ImpactFactors of 2004).Notwithstanding this difference, there is a clearshift in our choice towards green journals. In2005, only 42% of the papers, or 43% of thejournals in which we published, could bearchived in MOA, whereas in 2006 (the yearwe started MOA), 89% of the papers or 81%of the journals we published in, are green(Table 1). When taking the impact factor intoaccount, more green papers may result in adecrease in average impact. Even if journalimpact factors can be a measure ofperformance at all, it would at least be fair tocalculate the total score of impact factorsgathered in an equal time-scale. The totalscore in impact factors increased from 38.532in 2004 to 114.858 in 2005 and reached100.282 in September 2006. This means that,although already more papers are published in2006, there is not an increase in terms of thecumulative impact factor. This could beexplained by our choice for green journals.According to Laurence (2001), articles thatare freely available online are cited more thanarticles that are not freely available. It would beinteresting to see if MOA could deliver anincreased citation impact.Despite the open access movement, thejournal Marine Ecology Progress Series (MEPS),also called the ‘Citation King,’ is still verypopular and counts for 13 articles, which is17% of all our MarBEF papers. Only recently,MEPS has allowed for authors and researchgroups to buy open access for their papers.The result is that four out of six MarBEF paperspublished in MEPS of this year are freelyavailable in MOA.It is important to note that, today, thecopyright of a paper almost always remainswith the publisher and that a publisher canwithdraw from any collaborative projects withinthe Open Archive Initiative framework.Nowadays, many publishers agree to changethis copyright, so in order to secure openaccess to your paper, we suggest it is better toask for inclusion of the following clause in thecopyright form of your paper: ‘I hereby transferMarBEF publishing revisitedTable 1. Number of MarBEF paperspublished in ‘green’ or ‘white’ journals.2004 2005 2006Green papers 3 11 41White papers 2 15 5Total papers 5 26 6Green journals 3 7 17White journals 2 9 4Total journals 5 16 21Fucus vesiculosus at low tide.©English Nature17MarBEF NewsletterAutumn 2006to [publisher or journal] all rights to sell orlease the text (on paper and online) of mypaper [title]. I retain only the right todistribute it free for scholarly/scientificpurposes, in particular the right to self-archiveit publicly online on the Web.’Also worth mentioning is that it is not onlyMOA that gives a better visibility to ourMarBEF papers. The European OceanBiogeographic Information System (EurOBIS)systematically screens and captures all thespecies distribution data and provides themthrough an online interactive atlas. At themoment, over 1,700 distribution records arelisted that way.The number of MarBEF papers is increasingeach year, from five in 2004, to 26 in 2005and already 46 in September 2006 (including10 in press) (Table 1). It would be interestingto check if the number of authors and MarBEFpartner institutes involved in a paper alsoreflects the collaboration within the network.The numbers in Tables 2 and 3 show that themajority (54%) of all papers have only one tothree authors, and in 67% of all cases only oneMarBEF institute is involved, and in only 36%of these papers was there a collaborationoutside MarBEF (data not included in table).Overall, this means that the majority of MarBEFpapers are still written within a single instituteand within a small group of co-authors. On theother hand, the number of MarBEF papers inwhich more than one (even up to five) MarBEFinstitutes are collaborating is increasing – fromsix in 2005 to 14 in 2006. The sample we usedin this study is very small; we only countedpublications in peer-reviewed scientificjournals, but the more than 100 articlespublished in MarBEF newsletters and reportsare also important and should not beforgotten. We also didn’t compare the presentsituation with times before MarBEF, so drawingmain conclusions or marking clear trends atthis stage might be premature. What welearned is that now, after 2.5 years of MarBEFand one year of responsive mode researchprojects, the network is increasing in size andmore papers are being produced, both with apartnership approach, and in a wiser way (i.e.more freely accessible).ReferencesAppeltans, W; Haspeslagh, J; Vanden Berghe, E(2005). Publish wisely or perish? An openarchive for MarBEF. MarBEF Newsletter 3: 13.Lawrence, S, 2001. Free online availabilitysubstantially increases a paper’s impact. NatureVol 411, 521.SHERPA/RoMEO database – online at http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php.Table 3. Number of MarBEF papers inrelation to number of MarBEF institutesinvolved.Institutes 1 2 3 4 52004 3 0 1 1 02005 20 3 2 1 02006 22 11 2 0 1Total papers 45 14 5 2 1Table 2. Number of MarBEF papers in relation to number of authors.Authors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 15 212004 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 02005 5 8 3 3 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 02006 4 6 8 4 6 4 1 0 2 0 0 1Total papers 10 14 12 7 9 8 1 1 2 1 1 1Sampling for sediment samples on a site inspection. (© Crowncopyright 2006. Reproduced by permission of Cefas, Lowestoft.)Ward Appeltans, Jan Haspeslagh,Edward Vanden BergheMarBEF Data Management Officei/o Flanders Marine Institute (VLIZ)Email: info@marbef.org

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/536359/file/536360

MarBEF publishing revisited

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Aquatic Commons

Open Marine Archive

Ghent University Academic Bibliography