Letter to the editor: Predatory Publishers and Plagiarism Prevention
Jansen, P.A. ; Forget, P.M. - \ 2012
Science 336 (2012)6087. - ISSN 0036-8075 - p. 1380 - 1380.
M. Balter (“Reviewer's Déjà Vu, French science sleuthing uncover plagiarized papers,” News & Analysis, 9 March, p. 1157) describes how a scientist recently published at least nine articles that largely or entirely duplicated papers written by others and was exposed only after we found one of our papers integrally copied in a manuscript that both of us coincidentally received for review. What is remarkable here is not only the flagrant fraud, but the fact that six of these papers were published in scholarly journals only last year. Publishers can easily prevent publishing plagiarism by systematically running submitted manuscripts through software such as CrossCheck and eBlast (1, 2) or by running strings of words that are unlikely to be repeated by chance through search engines (3). It is evident that not all publishers systematically use these tools, despite the fact that plagiarism is common (1, 2). It is also noteworthy that these six 2011 papers—as well as the manuscript for review—are all from journals of publishers that Beall (4) lists as “predatory open-access scholarly publishers.” Such publishers “exploit the author-pays, Open-Access model for their own profit” and do not invest in quality control (4, 5). In this light, it is less surprising that papers escape plagiarism detection today. We argue that publishers that do not systematically use anti-plagiarism tools consciously take the risk of copyright infringement and of being accomplices in plagiarism. We encourage copyright holders to sue publishers of plagiarism for these offenses. When fines become a realistic threat, plagiarism prevention will become valuable even for predatory publishers
Above-ground biomass and productivity in a rain forest of eastern South America
Chave, J. ; Olivier, J. ; Bongers, F.J.J.M. ; Chatelet, P. ; Forget, P.M. ; Meer, P.J. van der; Norden, N. ; Riera, B. ; Charles-Dominique, P. - \ 2008
Journal of Tropical Ecology 24 (2008). - ISSN 0266-4674 - p. 355 - 366.
net primary production - wood specific-gravity - long-term plots - tropical forests - french-guiana - neotropical forest - live biomass - carbon - amazon - density
Abstract: The dynamics of tropical forest woody plants was studied at the Nouragues Field Station, central French Guiana. Stem density, basal area, above-ground biomass and above-ground net primary productivity, including the contribution of litterfall, were estimated from two large permanent census plots of 12 and 10 ha, established on contrasting soil types, and censused twice, first in 1992¿1994, then again in 2000¿2002. Mean stem density was 512 stems ha¿1 and basal area, 30m2 ha¿1. Stem mortality rate ranged between 1.51% and 2.06% y¿1. In both plots, stem density decreased over the study period. Using a correlation between wood density and wood hardness directly measured by a Pilodyn wood tester,we found that the mean wood densitywas 0.63 g cm¿3, 12% smaller than the mean of wood density estimated from the literature values for the species occurring in our plot. Above-ground biomass ranged from 356 to 398Mgha¿1 (oven-dry mass), and it increased over the census period. Leaf biomass was 6.47Mg ha¿1. Our total estimate of aboveground net primary productivity was 8.81 MgC ha¿1 y¿1 (in carbon units), not accounting for loss to herbivory, branchfalls, or biogenic volatile organic compounds, whichmay altogether account for an additional 1MgC ha¿1 y¿1. Coarse wood productivity (stem growth plus recruitment) contributed to 4.16 MgC ha¿1 y¿1. Litterfall contributed to 4.65MgC ha¿1 y¿1 with 3.16 MgC ha¿1 y¿1 due to leaves, 1.10 MgC ha¿1 y¿1 to twigs, and 0.39MgC ha¿1 y¿1 to fruits and flowers. The increase in above-ground biomass for both trees and lianas is consistentwith the hypothesis of a shift in the functioning of Amazonian rain forests driven by environmental changes, although alternative hypotheses such as a recovery from past disturbances cannot be ruled out at our site, as suggested by the observed decrease in stem density. Key Words: above-ground biomass, carbon, French Guiana, net primary productivity, tropical forest
|Seed allometry and disperser assemblages in tropical rain forests: a comparison of four floras on different continents
Forget, P.M. ; Dennis, A.J. ; Mazer, S.J. ; Jansen, P.A. ; Kitamura, S. ; Lambert, J.E. ; Westcott, D.A. - \ 2007
In: Seed dispersal: theory and its application in a changing world / Dennis, A.J., Green, R.J., Schupp, E.W., Westcott, D.A., Wallingford : CABI - ISBN 9781845931650 - p. 5 - 36.
Hunting increases dispersal limitation in the tree Carapa procera, a nontimber forest product
Forget, P.M. ; Jansen, P.A. - \ 2007
Conservation Biology 21 (2007)1. - ISSN 0888-8892 - p. 106 - 113.
orange-rumped agouti - seed dispersal - tropical forest - french-guiana - rain-forest - bertholletia-excelsa - dasyprocta-leporina - amazonian forests - recruitment - fate
The sustainability of seed extraction from natural populations has been questioned recently. Increased recruitment failure under intense seed harvesting suggests that seed extraction intensifies source limitation. Nevertheless, areas where more seeds are collected tend to also have more intense hunting of seed-dispersing animals. We studied whether such hunting, by limiting disperser activity, could cause quantitative dispersal limitation, especially for large crops and for crops in years of high seed abundance. In each of four Carapa procera (Meliaceae) populations in French Guiana and Surinam, two with hunting and two without, we compared seed fate for individual trees varying in crop size in years of high and low population-level seed abundance. Carapa seeds are a nontimber forest product and depend on dispersal by scatter-hoarding rodents for survival and seedling establishment. Hunting negatively affected the proportion of seeds dispersed and caused greater numbers of seeds to germinate or be infested by moths below parent trees, where they would likely die. Hunting of seed-dispersing animals disproportionally affected large seed crops, but we found no additional effect of population-level seed abundance on dispersal rates. Consistently lower rates of seed dispersal, especially for large seed crops, may translate to lower levels of seedling recruitment under hunting. Our results therefore suggest that the subsistence hunting that usually accompanies seed collection is at the cost of seed dispersal and may contribute to recruitment failure of these nontimber forest products. Seed extraction from natural populations may affect seedling recruitment less if accompanied by measures adequately incorporating and protecting seed dispersers