Freshwater Biology (FRESHWATER BIOL)

Publisher: Freshwater Biological Association, Wiley

Journal description

With a ISI Impact Factor of 1.392, Freshwater Biology is among the leading journals in the field of limnological research.The Journal publishes papers on all aspects of the ecology of lakes and rivers, including studies of micro-organisms, algae, macrophytes, invertebrates, fish and other vertebrates, as well as those concerning whole systems and related physical and chemical aspects of the environment. Manuscripts with an experimental or conceptual flavour are especially welcome, as are those which integrate laboratory and field work, and studies from less well researched areas of the world.

Current impact factor: 2.74

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 2.738
2013 Impact Factor 2.905
2012 Impact Factor 3.933
2011 Impact Factor 3.29
2010 Impact Factor 3.082
2009 Impact Factor 2.861
2008 Impact Factor 2.704
2007 Impact Factor 2.65
2006 Impact Factor 2.502
2005 Impact Factor 2.797
2004 Impact Factor 2.205
2003 Impact Factor 1.936
2002 Impact Factor 1.595
2001 Impact Factor 1.597
2000 Impact Factor 1.571
1999 Impact Factor 2.083
1998 Impact Factor 1.687
1997 Impact Factor 1.392
1996 Impact Factor 1.542
1995 Impact Factor 1.351
1994 Impact Factor 1.305
1993 Impact Factor 1.371
1992 Impact Factor 1.218

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 3.81
Cited half-life 9.30
Immediacy index 0.53
Eigenfactor 0.02
Article influence 1.18
Website Freshwater Biology website
Other titles Freshwater biology
ISSN 0046-5070
OCLC 1793027
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details


  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author cannot archive a post-print version
  • Restrictions
    • 12 months embargo
  • Conditions
    • Some journals have separate policies, please check with each journal directly
    • On author's personal website, institutional repositories, arXiv, AgEcon, PhilPapers, PubMed Central, RePEc or Social Science Research Network
    • Author's pre-print may not be updated with Publisher's Version/PDF
    • Author's pre-print must acknowledge acceptance for publication
    • Non-Commercial
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Publisher source must be acknowledged with citation
    • Must link to publisher version with set statement (see policy)
    • If OnlineOpen is available, BBSRC, EPSRC, MRC, NERC and STFC authors, may self-archive after 12 months
    • If OnlineOpen is available, AHRC and ESRC authors, may self-archive after 24 months
    • Publisher last contacted on 07/08/2014
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Wiley'
  • Classification
    ​ yellow

Publications in this journal

  • Freshwater Biology 09/2015; 60(9). DOI:10.1111/fwb.12631
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Freshwater habitats have been severely altered by human activities, and legislation has variously been passed requiring assessment of the damage in preparation for its repair. The current condition is generally measured against a reference state, which may be ‘natural’, meaning pre-Columbian, in the United States, pre-European in Australia or, in Europe, a habitat with ‘no, or negligible human influence’. Such standards are mostly unachievable at present because of a current economic philosophy that promotes exploitation of nature, but they are also nebulous. Even pristine habitats naturally change, so that there can be no single immutable reference state. Nonetheless, in Europe at least, the concept of the reference state has been particularly compromised, compared with the aspirations of the legislation.Apart from a very liberal approach to setting reference standards, there has been a major omission in contemplating the general nature of the reference state. The potential former roles of large herbivorous land mammals, such as horses, bovines, deer and, early in the Holocene, elephants and rhinoceri, and their predators, in nutrient transfers, have been ignored. The effects of such large mammals, particularly in influencing lakes, are assessed in the light of major losses of much of the Pleistocene fauna during the hunter-gatherer phase of human colonisation, and then subsequent near-complete attrition when agriculture, husbandry and forestry converted the majority of biomes to ‘anthromes’.Animals, and particularly large herbivorous mammals, transfer nutrients across catchments. Large mammals are likely to have maintained a state of turbid water and algal blooms in pristine, poorly flushed, shallow floodplain lakes. In contrast, we currently perceive these to be in a reference state when dominated by submerged plant communities in clear water. Although of conceptual interest, this may seem to have little practical relevance because the reference state has become a pragmatic and political construct rather than an ecological one.I counter such a view by arguing that mitigation of climate change must require replacement of substantial carbon sinks that have been lost, that ecological sinks within restored biomes are likely to be the most effective and that restoration of such systems must involve the important roles of large mammals, with the implications these have for our concepts of lake restoration.
    Freshwater Biology 06/2015; 60(9). DOI:10.1111/fwb.12614