Cargando…

Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science

The study of biodiversity has grown exponentially in the last thirty years in response to demands for greater understanding of the function and importance of Earth's biodiversity and finding solutions to conserve it. Here, we test the hypothesis that biodiversity science has become more interdi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Craven, Dylan, Winter, Marten, Hotzel, Konstantin, Gaikwad, Jitendra, Eisenhauer, Nico, Hohmuth, Martin, König‐Ries, Birgitta, Wirth, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6640045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31327991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5244
_version_ 1783436581237948416
author Craven, Dylan
Winter, Marten
Hotzel, Konstantin
Gaikwad, Jitendra
Eisenhauer, Nico
Hohmuth, Martin
König‐Ries, Birgitta
Wirth, Christian
author_facet Craven, Dylan
Winter, Marten
Hotzel, Konstantin
Gaikwad, Jitendra
Eisenhauer, Nico
Hohmuth, Martin
König‐Ries, Birgitta
Wirth, Christian
author_sort Craven, Dylan
collection PubMed
description The study of biodiversity has grown exponentially in the last thirty years in response to demands for greater understanding of the function and importance of Earth's biodiversity and finding solutions to conserve it. Here, we test the hypothesis that biodiversity science has become more interdisciplinary over time. To do so, we analyze 97,945 peer‐reviewed articles over a twenty‐two‐year time period (1990–2012) with a continuous time dynamic model, which classifies articles into concepts (i.e., topics and ideas) based on word co‐occurrences. Using the model output, we then quantify different aspects of interdisciplinarity: concept diversity, that is, the diversity of topics and ideas across subdisciplines in biodiversity science, subdiscipline diversity, that is, the diversity of subdisciplines across concepts, and network structure, which captures interactions between concepts and subdisciplines. We found that, on average, concept and subdiscipline diversity in biodiversity science were either stable or declining, patterns which were driven by the persistence of rare concepts and subdisciplines and a decline in the diversity of common concepts and subdisciplines, respectively. Moreover, our results provide evidence that conceptual homogenization, that is, decreases in temporal β concept diversity, underlies the observed trends in interdisciplinarity. Together, our results reveal that biodiversity science is undergoing a dynamic phase as a scientific discipline that is consolidating around a core set of concepts. Our results suggest that progress toward addressing the biodiversity crisis via greater interdisciplinarity during the study period may have been slowed by extrinsic factors, such as the failure to invest in research spanning across concepts and disciplines. However, recent initiatives such as the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) may attract broader support for biodiversity‐related issues and hence interdisciplinary approaches to address scientific, political, and societal challenges in the coming years.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6640045
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66400452019-07-19 Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science Craven, Dylan Winter, Marten Hotzel, Konstantin Gaikwad, Jitendra Eisenhauer, Nico Hohmuth, Martin König‐Ries, Birgitta Wirth, Christian Ecol Evol Academic Practice in Ecology and Evolution The study of biodiversity has grown exponentially in the last thirty years in response to demands for greater understanding of the function and importance of Earth's biodiversity and finding solutions to conserve it. Here, we test the hypothesis that biodiversity science has become more interdisciplinary over time. To do so, we analyze 97,945 peer‐reviewed articles over a twenty‐two‐year time period (1990–2012) with a continuous time dynamic model, which classifies articles into concepts (i.e., topics and ideas) based on word co‐occurrences. Using the model output, we then quantify different aspects of interdisciplinarity: concept diversity, that is, the diversity of topics and ideas across subdisciplines in biodiversity science, subdiscipline diversity, that is, the diversity of subdisciplines across concepts, and network structure, which captures interactions between concepts and subdisciplines. We found that, on average, concept and subdiscipline diversity in biodiversity science were either stable or declining, patterns which were driven by the persistence of rare concepts and subdisciplines and a decline in the diversity of common concepts and subdisciplines, respectively. Moreover, our results provide evidence that conceptual homogenization, that is, decreases in temporal β concept diversity, underlies the observed trends in interdisciplinarity. Together, our results reveal that biodiversity science is undergoing a dynamic phase as a scientific discipline that is consolidating around a core set of concepts. Our results suggest that progress toward addressing the biodiversity crisis via greater interdisciplinarity during the study period may have been slowed by extrinsic factors, such as the failure to invest in research spanning across concepts and disciplines. However, recent initiatives such as the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) may attract broader support for biodiversity‐related issues and hence interdisciplinary approaches to address scientific, political, and societal challenges in the coming years. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6640045/ /pubmed/31327991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5244 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Academic Practice in Ecology and Evolution
Craven, Dylan
Winter, Marten
Hotzel, Konstantin
Gaikwad, Jitendra
Eisenhauer, Nico
Hohmuth, Martin
König‐Ries, Birgitta
Wirth, Christian
Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title_full Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title_fullStr Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title_full_unstemmed Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title_short Evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
title_sort evolution of interdisciplinarity in biodiversity science
topic Academic Practice in Ecology and Evolution
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6640045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31327991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5244
work_keys_str_mv AT cravendylan evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT wintermarten evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT hotzelkonstantin evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT gaikwadjitendra evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT eisenhauernico evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT hohmuthmartin evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT konigriesbirgitta evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience
AT wirthchristian evolutionofinterdisciplinarityinbiodiversityscience