Last updated on

Advances in Agronomy
Latest Impact Factor IF - Analysis · Trend · Prediction · Ranking


User Feedback

Journal Impact IF

2021-2022

6.919

31.1%

Journal Impact IF Trend

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Popular Journals

Journal Research Scope

Advances in Agronomy

Research Scope

Research Scope

Advances in Agronomy

Research Scope

Journal Impact IF Ranking

Advances in Agronomy

Journal Impact IF Ranking
Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
Agronomy and Crop Science Q1 3/347

Agronomy and Crop Science 99%

Soil Science Q1 3/135

Soil Science 98%

Journal Impact IF Ranking

· In the Agronomy and Crop Science research field, the Quartile of Advances in Agronomy is Q1. Advances in Agronomy has been ranked #3 over 347 related journals in the Agronomy and Crop Science research category. The ranking percentile of Advances in Agronomy is around 99% in the field of Agronomy and Crop Science.
· In the Soil Science research field, the Quartile of Advances in Agronomy is Q1. Advances in Agronomy has been ranked #3 over 135 related journals in the Soil Science research category. The ranking percentile of Advances in Agronomy is around 98% in the field of Soil Science.

Related Journals

Advances in Agronomy

Similar Journals

Advances in Agronomy

The 2021-2022 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 6.919, which is just updated in 2022.

Advances in Agronomy Impact Factor
Highest IF
6.919
Highest Journal Impact IF

The highest Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 6.919.

Lowest IF
3.6
Lowest Journal Impact IF

The lowest Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 3.6.

Total Growth Rate
33.0%
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of Advances in Agronomy IF is 33.0%.

Annual Growth Rate
3.3%
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of Advances in Agronomy IF is 3.3%.

Journal Impact IF History

Advances in Agronomy

Journal Impact IF Trend

Year Journal Impact IF
Year Journal Impact IF
2022-2023 Check our Real-Time Impact Factor and Impact Factor Prediction Results
2020-2021 6.919
2019-2020 5.279
2018-2019 3.6
2017-2018 5.073
2016-2017 4.806
2015-2016 4.381
2014-2015 3.893
2013-2014 5.021
2012-2013 5.06
2011-2012 5.204
Journal Impact IF History

· The 2020-2021 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 6.919
· The 2019-2020 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 5.279
· The 2018-2019 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 3.6
· The 2017-2018 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 5.073
· The 2016-2017 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 4.806
· The 2015-2016 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 4.381
· The 2014-2015 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 3.893
· The 2013-2014 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 5.021
· The 2012-2013 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 5.06
· The 2011-2012 Journal Impact IF of Advances in Agronomy is 5.204

Advances in Agronomy

Journal Key Metrics
Journal Title Advances in Agronomy
ISSN 0065-2113
ISSN (Online) -
Publisher
Academic Press Inc.
Publication Frequency
-
Coverage
1949-1957, 1959-1972, 1974-1977, 1979-1984, 1986-1987, 1989-1999, 2001-2020
Open Access
NO
Language
English
Highest Impact Factor (2011 - 2022) 6.919
Lowest Impact Factor (2011 - 2022) 3.6
Total Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2011 - 2022) 33.0%
Avarage Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2011 - 2022) 3.3%
Annual Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2021 - 2022) 31.1 %
Publication Fees
Homepage
Submit Manuscript

Advances in Agronomy

Impact Factor 2022-2023 Prediction
Advances in Agronomy Impact Factor Predition System

Advances in Agronomy Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions

What is Impact Factor?

The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly average number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factor values are often deemed to be more important, or carry more intrinsic prestige in their respective fields, than those with lower values.

Advances in Agronomy | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

Impact factor is commonly used to evaluate the relative importance of a journal within its field and to measure the frequency with which the “average article” in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Journal which publishes more review articles will get highest IFs. Journals with higher IFs believed to be more important than those with lower ones. According to Eugene Garfield “impact simply reflects the ability of the journals and editors to attract the best paper available.” Journal which publishes more review articles will get maximum IFs. The Impact Factor of an academic journal is a scientometric Metric that reflects the yearly average number of citations that recent articles published in a given journal received. It is frequently used as a Metric for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher Impact Factor are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The Advances in Agronomy Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2021) by papers published in the Advances in Agronomy during the two preceding years (2019-2020). Note that 2021 Impact Factor are reported in 2022; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2021 publications have been processed by the indexing agency. New journals, which are indexed from their first published issue, will receive an impact factor after two years of indexing; in this case, the citations to the year prior to Volume 1, and the number of articles published in the year prior to Volume 1, are known zero values. Journals that are indexed starting with a volume other than the first volume will not get an impact factor until they have been indexed for three years. Occasionally, Journal Citation Reports assigns an impact factor to new journals with less than two years of indexing, based on partial citation data. The calculation always uses two complete and known years of item counts, but for new titles one of the known counts is zero. Annuals and other irregular publications sometimes publish no items in a particular year, affecting the count. The impact factor relates to a specific time period; it is possible to calculate it for any desired period. In addition to the 2-year Impact Factor, the 3-year Impact Factor, 4-year Impact Factor, 5-year Impact Factor, Real-Time Impact Factor can provide further insights and factors into the impact of Advances in Agronomy.

History

The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson ISI was sold to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate, which is now the publisher of the JCR.

Use

The impact factor is used to compare different journals within a certain field. The Web of Science indexes more than 11,500 science and social science journals. Journal impact factors are often used to evaluate the merit of individual articles and individual researchers. This use of impact factors was summarised by Hoeffel:

Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation. Experience has shown that in each specialty the best journals are those in which it is most difficult to have an article accepted, and these are the journals that have a high impact factor. Most of these journals existed long before the impact factor was devised. The use of impact factor as a measure of quality is widespread because it fits well with the opinion we have in each field of the best journals in our specialty....In conclusion, prestigious journals publish papers of high level. Therefore, their impact factor is high, and not the contrary.

Eugene Garfield

In brief, Impact factors may be used by:
  • Authors to decide where to submit an article for publication.
  • Libraries to make collection development decisions
  • Academic departments to assess academic productivity
  • Academic departments to make decisions on promotion and tenure.
As impact factors are a journal-level metric, rather than an article- or individual-level metric, this use is controversial. Garfield agrees with Hoeffel,but warns about the "misuse in evaluating individuals" because there is "a wide variation [of citations] from article to article within a single journal". Other things to consider about Impact Factors:
  • Many journals do not have an impact factor.
  • The impact factor cannot assess the quality of individual articles. Even if citations were evenly distributed among articles, the impact factor would only measure the interests of other researchers in an article, not its importance and usefulness.
  • Only research articles, technical notes and reviews are “citable” items. Editorials, letters, news items and meeting abstracts are “non-citable items”.
  • Only a small percentage of articles are highly cited and they are found in a small subset of journals. This small proportion accounts for a large percentage of citations.
  • Controversial papers, such as those based on fraudulent data, may be highly cited, distorting the impact factor of a journal.
  • Citation bias may exist. For example, English language resources may be favoured. Authors may cite their own work.
Moreover, informed and careful use of these impact data is essential, and should be based on a thorough understanding of the methodology used to generate impact factors. There are controversial aspects of using impact factors:
  • It is not clear whether the number of times a paper is cited measures its actual quality.
  • Some databases that calculate impact factors fail to incorporate publications including textbooks, handbooks and reference books.
  • Certain disciplines have low numbers of journals and usage. Therefore, one should only compare journals or researchers within the same discipline.
  • Review articles normally are cited more often and therefore can skew results.
  • Self-citing may also skew results.
  • Some resources used to calculate impact factors have inadequate international coverage.
  • Editorial policies can artificially inflate an impact factor.
Impact factors have often been used in advancement and tenure decision-making. Many recognize that this is a coarse tool for such important decisions, and that a multitude of factors should be taken into account in these deliberations. When considering the use of the impact factor (IF), keep these aspects in mind:
  • IF analysis is limited to citations from the journals indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge. Currently, the Web of Science indexes only 8621 journals across the full breadth of the sciences, and just 3121 in the social sciences.
  • A high IF/citation rate says nothing about the quality -- or even, validity -- of the references being cited. Notorious or even retracted articles often attract a lot of attention, hence a high number of citations. The notority related to the first publication on "cold fusion" is one such example.
  • Journals that publish more "review articles" are often found near the top of the rankings. While not known for publishing new, creative findings, these individual articles tend to be heavily cited.
  • The IF measures the average number of citations to articles in the journal -- given this, a small number of highly-cited articles will skew the figure.
  • It takes several years for new journals to be added to the list of titles indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge, so these newer titles will be under-represented.
  • It's alleged that journal editors have learned to "game" the system, encouraging authors to cite their works previously published in the same journal.
Comparing Journals Across Disciplines? Not a good idea! Using Impact Factors within a given discipline should only be done with great care, as described above. Using impact factor data to compare journals across disciplines is even more problematic. Here are some of the reasons:
  • Disciplines where older literature is still referenced, such as Chemistry and Mathematics, offer challenges to the methodolgy since older citations (older than two years) are not used to calculate the impact factor for a given journal. (Five-year impact factor analysis, which can be calculated using the Journal Citation Index database, helps smooth out this problem only to some degree.)
  • Different disciplines have different practices regarding tendency to cite larger numbers of references. Higher overall citation rates will bump upward impact factor measurements.
  • Where it's common for large numbers of authors to collaborate on a single paper, such as in Physics, the tendency of authors to cite themselves (and in this case, more authors) will result in increased citation rates.

Pros and Cons of the Impact Factor

Pros:

  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
Cons:
  • Individual articles makes an uneven contribution to overall Impact Factor.
  • Impact Factor does not account for certain things, things like context (postive or negative citaion) and intentionality (self-citation).
  • The metric is proprietary to and bound by the contents of the Thomson Reuters database.
  • Citations, on which the Impact Factor is based, count for less than 1% of an article's overall use.

Criticism

Numerous critiques have been made regarding the use of impact factors. A 2007 study noted that the most fundamental flaw is that impact factors present the mean of data that are not normally distributed, and suggested that it would be more appropriate to present the median of these data. There is also a more general debate on the validity of the impact factor as a measure of journal importance and the effect of policies that editors may adopt to boost their impact factor (perhaps to the detriment of readers and writers). Other criticism focuses on the effect of the impact factor on behavior of scholars, editors and other stakeholders. Others have made more general criticisms, arguing that emphasis on impact factor results from negative influence of neoliberal policies on academia claiming that what is needed is not just replacement of the impact factor with more sophisticated metrics for science publications but also discussion on the social value of research assessment and the growing precariousness of scientific careers in higher education.
Experts stress that there are limitations in using impact factors to evaluate a scholar's work. There are many reasons cited for not relying on impact factor alone to evaluate the output of a particular individual. Among these are the following:

  • A single factor is not sufficient for evaluating an author's work.
  • Journal values are meaningless unless compared within the same discipline. Impact factors vary among disciplines.
  • The impact factor was originally devised to show the impact of a specific journal, not a specific scholar. The quality and impact of the author's work may extend beyond the impact of a particular journal.
According to Jim Testa, a researcher for ThomsonReuters Scientific, the most widespread misuse of the Impact Factor is to evaluate the work of an individual author (instead of a journal). "To say that because a researcher is publishing in a certain journal, he or she is more influential or deserves more credit is not necessarily true. There are many other variables to consider." (interview 6/26/2008 in Thomson Reuters blog entry)

Advances in Agronomy
Journal Profile

About

Advances in Agronomy is a first-rate resource describing the latest research in agronomy. This prestigious serial contains major review articles dealing with the current topics of interest to agronomists, crop scientists and soil scientists. As always, the subjects covered are varied and exemplary of the myriad subject matter dealt with by this long-running serial. About the Editor: Donald Sparks, S. Hallock None

ISSN
0065-2113
ISSN

The ISSN of Advances in Agronomy is 0065-2113 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

ISSN (Online)
-
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of Advances in Agronomy is - . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

Publisher
Academic Press Inc.
Publisher

Advances in Agronomy is published by Academic Press Inc. .

Publication Frequency
-
Publication Frequency

Advances in Agronomy publishes reports - .

Coverage
1949-1957, 1959-1972, 1974-1977, 1979-1984, 1986-1987, 1989-1999, 2001-2020
Coverage

The Publication History of Advances in Agronomy covers 1949-1957, 1959-1972, 1974-1977, 1979-1984, 1986-1987, 1989-1999, 2001-2020 .

Open Access
NO
Open Access

Publication Fees
Publication Fees

Language
English
Language

The language of Advances in Agronomy is English .

Country/Region
United States
Country/Region

The publisher of Advances in Agronomy is Academic Press Inc. , which locates in United States .

International Collaboration Trend

Advances in Agronomy

Cited Documents Trend

Advances in Agronomy

Total Publications
916
Total Citations
147547

Annual Publication Volume

Advances in Agronomy

Annual Citation Record

Advances in Agronomy

Publications Cites Dataset

Advances in Agronomy

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
1950 4 3
1951 6 6
1952 9 7
1953 6 13
1954 8 17
1955 9 40
1956 7 31
1957 8 28
1958 0 52
1959 16 75
1960 7 69
1961 7 46
1962 6 93
1963 6 122
1964 9 117
1965 6 149
1966 7 173
1967 7 145
1968 7 164
1969 6 193
1970 6 269
1971 8 252
1972 8 340
1973 0 336
1974 13 405
1975 8 427
1976 9 483
1977 9 507
1978 0 623
1979 7 630
1980 16 782
1981 8 786
1982 8 777
1983 10 1011
1984 10 927
1985 0 885
1986 19 973
1987 10 914
1988 0 959
1989 9 1127
1990 15 1107
1991 14 1122
1992 11 1031
1993 15 1272
1994 9 1119
1995 15 1281
1996 19 1435
1997 26 1459
1998 7 1477
1999 24 1786
2000 0 1913
2001 25 2338
2002 15 2400
2003 22 2832
2004 19 3155
2005 28 3248
2006 17 3754
2007 27 4029
2008 28 4310
2009 23 4881
2010 27 5668
2011 23 6433
2012 24 7067
2013 33 8062
2014 31 8592
2015 32 9367
2016 28 8108
2017 38 7831
2018 6 7073
2019 5 7832
2020 5 9481
2021 0 1128
Publications Cites Dataset

· The Advances in Agronomy has published 4 reports and received 3 citations in 1950.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 6 citations in 1951.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 7 citations in 1952.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 13 citations in 1953.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 17 citations in 1954.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 40 citations in 1955.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 31 citations in 1956.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 28 citations in 1957.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 52 citations in 1958.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 16 reports and received 75 citations in 1959.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 69 citations in 1960.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 46 citations in 1961.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 93 citations in 1962.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 122 citations in 1963.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 117 citations in 1964.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 149 citations in 1965.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 173 citations in 1966.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 145 citations in 1967.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 164 citations in 1968.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 193 citations in 1969.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 269 citations in 1970.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 252 citations in 1971.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 340 citations in 1972.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 336 citations in 1973.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 13 reports and received 405 citations in 1974.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 427 citations in 1975.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 483 citations in 1976.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 507 citations in 1977.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 623 citations in 1978.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 630 citations in 1979.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 16 reports and received 782 citations in 1980.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 786 citations in 1981.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 8 reports and received 777 citations in 1982.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 10 reports and received 1011 citations in 1983.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 10 reports and received 927 citations in 1984.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 885 citations in 1985.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 19 reports and received 973 citations in 1986.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 10 reports and received 914 citations in 1987.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 959 citations in 1988.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 1127 citations in 1989.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 15 reports and received 1107 citations in 1990.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 14 reports and received 1122 citations in 1991.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 11 reports and received 1031 citations in 1992.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 15 reports and received 1272 citations in 1993.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 9 reports and received 1119 citations in 1994.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 15 reports and received 1281 citations in 1995.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 19 reports and received 1435 citations in 1996.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 26 reports and received 1459 citations in 1997.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 7 reports and received 1477 citations in 1998.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 24 reports and received 1786 citations in 1999.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 1913 citations in 2000.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 25 reports and received 2338 citations in 2001.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 15 reports and received 2400 citations in 2002.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 22 reports and received 2832 citations in 2003.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 19 reports and received 3155 citations in 2004.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 28 reports and received 3248 citations in 2005.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 17 reports and received 3754 citations in 2006.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 27 reports and received 4029 citations in 2007.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 28 reports and received 4310 citations in 2008.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 23 reports and received 4881 citations in 2009.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 27 reports and received 5668 citations in 2010.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 23 reports and received 6433 citations in 2011.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 24 reports and received 7067 citations in 2012.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 33 reports and received 8062 citations in 2013.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 31 reports and received 8592 citations in 2014.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 32 reports and received 9367 citations in 2015.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 28 reports and received 8108 citations in 2016.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 38 reports and received 7831 citations in 2017.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 6 reports and received 7073 citations in 2018.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 5 reports and received 7832 citations in 2019.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 5 reports and received 9481 citations in 2020.
· The Advances in Agronomy has published 0 reports and received 1128 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of Advances in Agronomy is 916.
· The total citations of Advances in Agronomy is 147547.

Share Your Impact Factor Information with Community

Do you know the Latest Impact Factor of Advances in Agronomy? Share with the community!

Impact Factor

What is the Latest Impact Factor?

Data Source

Where do you get the information?



Impact Factor Data Source
Impact Factor Data Source
6.919 Wikipedia

Thanks for sharing your information with us!

Advances in Agronomy - DOI: 10.1016/bs.agron.2019.10.002
Designing intercrops for high yield, yield stability and efficient use of resources: Are there principles?

Tjeerd-Jan Stomph · Christos Dordas · Alain Baranger · Joshua de Rijk · Bei Dong · Jochem B. Evers · Chunfeng Gu · Long Li · Johan Simon · Erik Steen Jensen · Qi Wang · Yuyun Wang · Zishen Wang · Huasen Xu · Chaochun Zhang · Lizhen Zhang · Wei-Ping Zhang · Laurent Bedoussac · Wopke van der Werf ·

Mathematics
PDF

Advances in Agronomy - DOI: 10.1016/BS.AGRON.2019.07.003
Application of grazing land models in ecosystem management: Current status and next frontiers

Liwang Ma · Justin D. Derner · R. Daren Harmel · John Tatarko · Andrew D. Moore · C. Alan Rotz · David J. Augustine · Randall B. Boone · Michael B. Coughenour · Pierre C. Beukes · Mark T. van Wijk · Gianni Bellocchi · Brendan R. Cullen · Hailey Wilmer ·

Environmental Science
PDF
Scientific Writng Keywords