Bibliometric analysis of publications by South African viticulture and oenology research centres

  • Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent Spanish Research Council-CSIC, IHCD López Piñero, Valencia
  • Jose L. Aleixandre-Tudo Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Valencia
  • Gregorio González Alcaide Dapartamento de Historia de la Ciencia y Documentacion, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia
  • Antonia Ferrer-Sapena Departamento de Comunicacion Audiovisual, Documentacion e Historia del Arte, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Valencia
  • Jose L. Aleixandre Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Valencia
  • Wessel du Toit Department of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch
Keywords: scientific publications, viticulture, oenology, South Africa, bibliometric indicators


We analysed the production, impact factor of, and scientific collaboration involved in viticulture and oenology articles associated with South African research centres published in international journals during the period 1990–2009. The articles under scrutiny were obtained from the Science Citation Index database, accessed via the Web of Knowledge platform. The search strategy employed specific viticulture and oenology terms and was restricted to the field ‘topic’. The results showed that 406 articles were published during the review period, with the most number of publications being in the South African Journal of Enology and Viticulture (n = 34), American Journal of Enology and Viticulture (n = 16) and Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (n = 16). The articles were published by 851 authors from 236 institutions. The collaboration rate was 3.7 authors per article, having grown over the two decades examined. The most productive institutions (i.e. those receiving a greater number of citations) were Stellenbosch University (219 published articles and 2592 citations) and the Agricultural Research Council (49 published articles and 454 citations), both from South Africa. Graphical representation of co-authorship networks identified 18 groups of authors and a single network of institutions whose core is Stellenbosch University. In conclusion, we have identified a significant growth in South African viticulture and oenology research in recent years, with a high degree of internationalisation and a constant level of domestic collaboration.


1. Aleixandre JL, Crespo F. [National and international wine geography]. Valencia: Editorial Intertécnica; 2005. Spanish.

2.Melamane XL, Strong PJ, Burgess JE. Treartment of wine distillery wastewater: A review with emphasis on anaerobic membrane reactors. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2007;28:25–36.

3. Keyser M, Britz TJ, Witthuhn RC. Fingerprinting and identification of bacteria present in UASB granules used to treat winery, brewery, distillery or peach-lye canning wastewater. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2007;28:69–79.

4. Sigge GO, Green J, Du Plessis KR, Britz TJ. Investigating the effect of ozone on the biodegradability of distillery wastewater. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2007;28:155–162.

5. Zingelwa NS, Wooldridge J. Uptake and accumulation of mineral elements from winery and distillery effluents by Typha latifolia and Phragmites australis. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2009;30:43–48.

6. Vaudour E, Shaw AB. A worldwide perspective on viticultural zoning. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2005;26:106–115.

7. Retief E, Damm U, Van Niekerk JM, McLeod A, Fourie R. A protocol for molecular detection of Phaeomoniella chlamydospora in grapevine wood. S Afr J Sci. 2005;101:139–142.

8. Koopman TA, Linde CC, Fourie PH, McLeod A. Epidemiological importance of Plasmopara viticola oosporic infections in South African vineyards. S Afr J Sci. 2007;103(1/2):9.

9. Pietersen G. Tackling the grapevine leafroll disease problem in South Africa. S Afr J Sci. 2007;103(1/2):2.

10. Van Niekerk JM, Halleen F, Fourie PH. Spore dispersal patterns of grapevine trunk disease pathogens. S Afr J Sci. 2007;103(1/2):8.

11. Minnaar PP, Booyse M. Differentiation between wines according to geographical regions in the Western Cape (South Africa) using multivariate analysis based on selected chemical parameters in young red wines. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2004;25:89–93.

12. Minnaar PP, Rohwer ER, Booyse M. Investigating the use of element analysis for differentiation between the geographic origins of Western Cape wines. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2005;26:95–105.

13. De Beer D, Joubert E, Marais J, Du Toit W, Fourie B, Manley M. Characterisation of Pinotage wine during maturation on different oak products. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2008;29:39–49.

14. Van Jaarsveld FP, Hatting S, Minnaar P. Rapid induction of ageing character in brandy products. Part I. Effects of extraction media and preparation conditions. S Afr J Enol Vit. 2009;30:1–15.

15. Sooryamoorthy R. Medical research in South Africa: A scientometric analysis of trends, patterns, productivity and partnership. Scientometrics. 2010;84:863–885.

16. Molatudi M, Moltja N, Pouris A. A bibliometric study of bioinformatics research in South Africa. Scientometrics. 2009;81:47–59.

17. Sooryamoorthy R. Scientific publications of engineers in South Africa, 1975–2005. Scientometrics. 2010;86(1):211–226.

18. Pouris A, Pouris A. Scientometrics of a pandemic: HIV/AIDS research in South Africa and the World. Scientometrics. 2010;86(2):541–552.

19. Kahn M. A bibliometric analysis of South Africa’s scientific outputs – some trends and implications. S Afr J Sci. 2011;107(1/2), Art. #406, 6 pages.
20. Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics. 1986;10:157–177.

21. White HD, Mccain K. Bibliometrics. Ann Rev Inf Sci Tech. 1989;24:119–186.

22. Van Raan AFJ. Scientometrics: State-of-the-art. Scientometrics. 1997;38:205–218.

23. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. J Am Med Assoc. 2006;295:90–93., PMid:16391221

24. Aleixandre-Benavent R, Valderrama Zurian JC, Gonzalez Alcaide G. [The impact factor of scientific journals: Limitations and alternative indicators]. Prof Inf. 2007;16:4–11. Spanish.

25. Kretschmer H. Coauthorship networks of invisible college and institutionalized communities. Scientometrics. 1994;30:363–369.

26. Frame JD, Carpenter MP. International research collaboration. Soc Stud Sci. 1979;9:481–497.

27. Katz JS, Martin BR. What is research collaboration? Res Policy. 1997;26:1–18.

28. Newman MEJ. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:5200–5205., PMid:14745042, PMCid:387296

29. Melin G, Persson O. Studying research collaboration using coauthorships. Scientometrics. 1996;36:363–377.

30. Gonzalez-Alcaide G, Valderrama-Zurian JC, Aleixandre-Benavent R. Research fronts and collaboration patterns in Reproductive Biology. Coauthorship networks and institutional collaboration. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:941–956., PMid:18177648

31. Scott JP. Social network analysis: A handbook. London: Sage; 2001.

32. Newman MEJ. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:404–409., PMid:11149952

33. Gonzalez-Alcaide G, Alonso Arroyo A, Gonzalez De Dios J, Perez Sempere A, Valderrama Zurian JC, Aleixandre-Benavent R. [Co-authorship networks and institutional collaboration in Revista de Neurología]. Rev Neurol. 2008;46:642–651. Spanish. PMid:18509820

34.Glanzel W, Veugelers R. Science for wine: A bibliometric assessment for wine and grape research for wine-producing and consuming countries. Am J Enol Viticult. 2006;57:23–32.

35. Bibliometrics program. Version 1. Valencia: Spanish Research Council-CSIC; 2010.

36.Batagelj V, Mrvar A. Pajek program for large network analysis. Slovenia: University of Ljubljana; 2001.

37. Tijssen RJW, Mouton J, Leeuwen TN, Boshoff N. How relevant are local scholarly journals in global science? A case study of South Africa. Res Eval. 2006;15:163–174.

38.Cunningham SJ, Dillon SM. Authorship patterns in information systems. Scientometrics. 1997;39:19–27.

39. Klein JT. Interdisciplinary needs: The current context. Libr Trends. 1996;45:134–154.

40. Ponds R. The limits to internationalization of scientific research collaboration. J Technol Transf. 2009;34:76–94.

41. Sooryamoorthy R. Collaboration and publication: How collaborative are scientists in South Africa? Scientometrics. 2009;80:419–439.

42. Georghiou L. Global cooperation in research. Res Pol. 1998;27:611–626.

43. Valderrama Zurian JC, Gonzalez Alcaide G, Valderrama Zurian FJ, Aleixandre-Benavent R, Miguel Dasit A. [Co-authorship networks and institutional collaboration in Revista Española de Cardiología]. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2007;60:117–130. Spanish. PMid:17338877

44. Barabasi AL, Albert R. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science. 1999;286:509–511. 50Wagner CS, Leydesdorff, L. Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Res Pol. 2005;34:1608–1618.

45. Wagner CS, Leydesdorff, L. Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Res Pol. 2005;34:1608–1618. http://

46. Figg WD, Duna L, Liewehr DJ, et al. Scientific collaboration results in higher citation rates of published articles. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26:759–767., PMid:16716129

47. Teasley S, Wolinsky S. Scientific collaborations at a distance. Science. 2001;292:2254–2255., PMid:11423638

48. Merrill J, Hripcsak G. Using social network analysis within a department of biomedical informatics to induce a discussion of academic communities of practice. J, PMid:18756000, PMCid:2585526

49. Saegusa A. Survey finds deep insularity among Japanese scientists. Nature. 1999;401:314.

50. Cusmano L, Morrison A, Rabellotti R. Catching up trajectories in the wine sector: A comparative study of Chile, Italy, and South Africa. World Dev. 2010;38(11):1588–1602.