Journal profile

Brazilian Journal of Biology

Final score

26.36 out of 100

comparable only within the subject subfield Methodology : Final score

KZ-SJR

3.73

Methodology : KZ-SJR

Data confidence

60 out of 100 medium

Rising
Data-confidence history
Date Confidence
2026-10-23 35
2026-10-25 60
Shows the past trend of data confidence, not a forecast or a quality judgement.

rates our data about the journal, not the journal itself Methodology : Data confidence

Full methodology
View metrics
Metadata (CSL-JSON)
Report a data issue

Log in to report an error.

General information

Publisher
Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (Brazil)
Funding type
Unknown
ISSN (print)
1519-6984
ISSN (electronic)
1678-4375

Publishing policy & standards

Peer review

Review type
No data
Average manuscript review time
No data
Publication speed
No data

Open access & APC

Open access type
Open access: Gold
APC cost
No data

Standards compliance

COPE membership
Unknown
Plan S compliance
No data
License
CC BY
DOAJ directory
Indexed in DOAJ

Metrics

Figures as of 10/25/2026

Final score

26.36

out of 100; comparable only within the subject subfield

How computed

Weighted sum of the entity's normalised metrics, scaled to 0–100; the weights are versioned and configurable and set the ranking position. Compare only within the same subject subfield.

Full methodology
KZ-SJR

3.73

How computed

Iterative PageRank-like score over the citation graph: each citation is weighted by the citing journal's rank; domestic citations get a versioned coefficient (1.10–1.25). Scaled to 0–100.

Full methodology
Impact Factor

0.6

How computed

Current-year citations to the journal's articles from the previous 2 years, divided by the number of those articles. Source: Crossref/OpenAlex.

Full methodology
Impact Factor (5-year)

0.55

How computed

Like the Impact Factor but over a 5-year window: current-year citations to articles from the previous 5 years, divided by those articles.

Full methodology
CiteScore

0.45

How computed

Citations received over a three-year window by the journal's articles published in that same window, divided by the number of those articles. Source: Crossref/OpenAlex.

Full methodology
h-index

5

How computed

The largest number h such that h publications have each been cited at least h times.

Full methodology
h5-index

5

How computed

Same as the h-index, but restricted to publications from the last 5 years.

Full methodology
Total citations

90

How computed

Total citations received by all of the journal's publications over the period. Source: Crossref/OpenAlex.

Full methodology
Citations per paper

0.72

How computed

Total citations divided by the total number of publications over the period.

Full methodology
FWCI

1.89

How computed

Field-Weighted Citation Impact: the mean over the journal's articles of (actual ÷ expected citations for the article's subfield and year); 1.0 = the field average. Display-only — not a ranking weight.

Full methodology
RCR

1.88

How computed

Relative Citation Ratio: the journal's total citations divided by the total expected for its field and year (a ratio of sums, versus FWCI's mean of ratios). Declared in the target configuration of the Final Score; not part of the calculation in force yet.

Full methodology
Eigenfactor

0.06

How computed

PageRank-style influence over the 5-year journal-to-journal citation graph with self-citations removed. Reported as the journal's share of total network influence (Σ across all journals = 100).

Full methodology
Article Influence Score

0.38

How computed

Eigenfactor normalised by the journal's share of articles in the 5-year window: AIS = (0.01·EF) / article_share. The Platform corpus's average journal scores 1.0.

Full methodology
Immediacy Index

0.02

How computed

Citations a journal's articles receive in their year of publication, divided by the number of those articles. Same-year impact.

Full methodology
Cited Half-Life

2

How computed

Median age (in years) of the articles cited in the current year. Higher values mean longer-lived references.

Full methodology
Open Access share

100%

How computed

Share of articles published in the last 5 years with oa_status ∈ {gold, green, hybrid}. Source: Crossref/OpenAlex/Unpaywall.

Full methodology
Inter-university co-authorship share

85%

How computed

Share of the journal's last-5-years articles co-authored across two or more different Kazakhstani universities. Domestic (KZ↔KZ) collaboration; advisory display metric, not part of the ranking.

Full methodology
No data for 1 metric International co-authorship share Show how they are calculated Collapse the list

These values have not been calculated for this journal yet. How each metric is calculated and what data it needs:

  • International co-authorship share

    Share of the journal's articles over the last 5 years that have at least one author from a country other than the journal's own. An article with several foreign co-authors counts once; an article where no author's country can be resolved is left out. Computed from Crossref/OpenAlex affiliations.

    Methodology : International co-authorship share

Methodology

Where these numbers come from

No number on this page was entered at a guess. Each one is gathered from external databases, matched by identifier, validated and computed by a fixed formula. Below is the whole path: where the data comes from, how it is matched and checked, and what the metrics behind the final score measure. Every other metric states its own formula — in the metric grid above.

Sources

The platform collects data from eleven external databases and services. Each source is enabled separately and has its own harvesting schedule. The main ones:

  • Crossref — publication metadata by DOI: authors and journal details.
  • OpenAlex — publications, authors, journals, organisations and subject categories.
  • ORCID — researcher profiles, their affiliations and publications.
  • DOAJ — open access licences and whether the journal is indexed in DOAJ.
  • Unpaywall — the open access status of an article by its DOI.

Some details do not come from harvesting: editorial offices fill in individual fields, administrators enter and correct data, and file upload is supported. Such records go through the same matching and confidence rules, but do not count as an external source.

Calculation window

Each metric has its own window: two years for the impact factor, three for CiteScore, five for the five-year impact factor and for the expected-citation baseline. Rankings are recalculated on a schedule rather than on every data update: the planned recalculation runs once a day during the night hours, the previous version stays available while it runs, and new values become public for all objects at the same time.

Verification

Records are matched by DOI and journals by ISSN; where identifiers are missing, titles are compared: a similarity of 95 % or above merges records automatically, 90–94 % sends them to manual review. Duplicates are not thrown away: on a merge the data and links move to the canonical record, and its former address permanently redirects there, so previously published links and exports keep working.

Manual corrections

A metric value can be corrected manually by the platform's editorial team. It is the corrected value that is shown publicly and used for sorting — in listings, rankings, the profile, comparison, exports and open data — and it carries a note that it was corrected manually. The formulas do not change: a correction fixes a single value, not the methodology.

The data path

Five steps from someone else's record of an article to the number on this page.

  1. 1

    Harvesting Records of articles, references and authors are pulled from external sources on a schedule: each source carries its own, stored alongside it. A failure of one source does not stop harvesting from the rest. For every record we track how many independent sources confirmed the data.

  2. 2

    Matching A DOI match means the same object, an ISSN match the same journal. A match does not create a new record — it confirms the one already collected and raises the number of confirming sources; where identifiers are missing, titles are compared.

  3. 3

    Normalisation Titles, dates and formats are brought to a single form; the anchor identifiers are DOI for articles, ISSN for journals, ORCID for authors and ROR for organisations. Subjects are not derived anew: the topic hierarchy is loaded into a reference book, and ready-made subject assignments are imported and aggregated up to the journal level. Under a separate rule, the language versions of one work are linked into a group rather than merged into one record, and uncertain matches go to manual review.

  4. 4

    Scoring Every record gets a confidence score from 0 to 100. It is raised by confirmed identifiers, agreement between several independent sources, completeness of the mandatory fields and freshness of the update; it is lowered by conflicts between sources, missing identifiers and a low-trust source. From 80 the record is published without extra review; 60–79 is published but at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable; below 60 it is not published until a review confirms it.

  5. 5

    Calculation Metrics are computed by the formulas below and published together with their calculation window and confidence score. A metric that does not clear the confidence threshold is left out of the final score; an object that does not clear the publication threshold enters neither the ranking nor the cohort the metrics are normalised against.

Formulas in words

The same explanation that opens next to each metric, collected into a single table. The formulas are fixed: a change of methodology is introduced as a new version with an effective date, and earlier results are kept with their version mark and never rewritten retroactively.

Metrics behind the final score: what exactly is counted, the calculation windows and the sources
Metric What exactly is counted Window Sources
Impact Factor The average number of citations to the journal's articles over a two-year window: the sum of citations divided by the number of articles in the same period. 2 years of publications Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
Impact Factor (5-year) The same rule with a five-year window of publications. 5 years of publications Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
h-index The largest h for which the journal has h articles cited at least h times each. No year window: all articles with a known citation count Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
h5-index The same h-index computed over the articles of the last five years only. Articles of the last 5 years Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
CiteScore The average number of citations over a three-year window. 3 years Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
FWCI The average across articles of the ratio between actual citations and those expected for their subject subfield and year of publication. A value above one means citation rates above average. 5 years of publications, citations counted cumulatively Platform corpus: Kazakhstan works from OpenAlex and Crossref
KZ-SJR The iterative weight of a journal in the journal-to-journal citation network: a citing journal's contribution is proportional to its own rank, so a reference from a more influential journal weighs more. A local-impact coefficient applies to citations between different Kazakhstani journals whose affiliation is confirmed; journal self-citations and foreign citations count at the base weight. The resulting values are normalised to a 0–100 scale and split into quartiles. No separate window Computed from the journal-to-journal citation network
Immediacy Index The average number of citations articles receive in their year of publication. Current year Computed from the collected corpus of articles and citations
Final score A weighted sum of metrics. The metrics are first normalised within the subject subfield — from 0 to 1 against the maximum in that subfield — and the quartiles are computed there as well. The target weight configuration is impact factor 25 %, KZ-SJR 20 %, CiteScore 15 %, h-index 15 %, RCR 15 %, quartile 10 %; for now a reduced subset of it applies — KZ-SJR, impact factor and h-index. No separate window: recalculated on schedule The metrics listed above

The data quality behind every number

Confidence is a service score of our data about an object, not an expert judgement of the object itself. A low value means the sources disagree with each other, mandatory fields or identifiers are missing, or the data came from a low-trust source.

The platform reconciles differences between sources regularly: critical fields and the metrics that form the ranking at least once a week, less sensitive reference data at least once a month. A small discrepancy is only logged; a significant one creates a manual review task with an assigned owner.

You can report an error in the data through the feedback form: the request enters the tracking system and is followed through to a reply to the person who sent it.

Full methodology Report a data issue

The methodology changes by versions: each has an effective date, and earlier values are never rewritten retroactively.

Subject areas and topics

Topics of this journal

Loading topics…

Similar journals and citation network

The journal's position in the inter-journal citation network.

Loading…

Loading recommendations…

Issues and articles

This journal has no issues yet.

Recent articles

Editorial board

The editorial board of this journal has not been listed yet.

Open peer reviews

Source: manual entry by the editorial team or administration. Peer reviews do not affect the ranking.

Loading peer reviews

International ranking crosswalk

This is RankScience data arranged in the structure of the international ranking — not official ranking scores.

Loading…

For editors

This section is addressed to the journal's editors, not to its readers: advisory suggestions from the journal's topic profile and the wider literature. They do not affect the ranking.

Loading suggestions…