IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i18p11632-d916721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biofortification—Present Scenario, Possibilities and Challenges: A Scientometric Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Pooja Srivastav

    (School of Agriculture, SR University, Warangal 506371, Telangana, India)

  • Mahesh Vutukuru

    (School of Engineering, SR University, Warangal 506371, Telangana, India)

  • Gobinath Ravindran

    (School of Engineering, SR University, Warangal 506371, Telangana, India)

  • Mohamed M. Awad

    (Mechanical Power Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt)

Abstract

Biofortification refers to the process by which food crops are improved by the application of biotechnology, conventional plant breeding, and agronomic practices to increase the bioavailability of their nutritious components to human consumers. The biofortification of staple crops is a long-term, sustainable solution to address nutritional inadequacies. Thus, it is a practical and cost-effective way to provide micronutrients to communities that have limited access to various meals and other micronutrient therapies. Existing therapies, such as supplementation and industrial food fortification, which are insufficient to eliminate micronutrient deficiencies on their own, are complemented by biofortification. However, biofortification offers two substantial competitive advantages: the capacity to reach underserved rural communities and long-term cost-effectiveness. Biofortified crops can also be used to target rural populations with limited access to various dietary options or other micronutrient therapies. Hence, an attempt is made herein to provide an overview of the biofortification literature by employing scientometric and network analysis tools to examine records extracted from the Scopus database that were published between 2010 and 2021. This study investigates the most influential authors and journals, top-contributing institutions and countries, variations across publication years, co-occurrence analysis of keywords, and bibliographic coupling of sources. The results obtained through this study describe the real impact of the research published to date and its usage.

Suggested Citation

  • Pooja Srivastav & Mahesh Vutukuru & Gobinath Ravindran & Mohamed M. Awad, 2022. "Biofortification—Present Scenario, Possibilities and Challenges: A Scientometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11632-:d:916721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11632/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11632/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2010. "Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(3), pages 495-506, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Teja Koler-Povh & Primož Južnič & Goran Turk, 2014. "Impact of open access on citation of scholarly publications in the field of civil engineering," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1033-1045, February.
    2. Esther Salmerón-Manzano & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro, 2018. "The Higher Education Sustainability through Virtual Laboratories: The Spanish University as Case of Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Judit Bar-Ilan: information scientist, computer scientist, scientometrician," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1235-1244, December.
    4. J.R. Clark & Joshua C. Hall & Ashley S. Harrison, 2017. "The Relative Value of AER P&P Economic Education Papers," Working Papers 17-23, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    5. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2012. "Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 343-351, May.
    6. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1160-1177.
    7. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2012. "Publication and patent analysis of European researchers in the field of production technology and manufacturing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 89-100, October.
    8. Martin-Martin, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Harzing, Anne-Wil & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2017. "Can we use Google Scholar to identify highly-cited documents?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 152-163.
    9. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Bibliometric positioning of scientific manufacturing journals: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 463-485, February.
    10. Yong Yi & Wei Qi & Dandan Wu, 2013. "Are CIVETS the next BRICs? A comparative analysis from scientometrics perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 615-628, February.
    11. Ole Ellegaard & Johan A. Wallin, 2015. "The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1809-1831, December.
    12. Antonio Cavacini, 2015. "What is the best database for computer science journal articles?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2059-2071, March.
    13. Joost C. F. Winter & Amir A. Zadpoor & Dimitra Dodou, 2014. "The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1547-1565, February.
    14. Maja Jokić & Andrea Mervar & Stjepan Mateljan, 2019. "Comparative analysis of book citations in social science journals by Central and Eastern European authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1005-1029, September.
    15. Lal, Madan & Kumar, Satish & Pandey, Dharen Kumar & Rai, Varun Kumar & Lim, Weng Marc, 2023. "Exchange rate volatility and international trade," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Dalia El Khaled & Nuria Novas & Jose-Antonio Gazquez & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro, 2018. "Dielectric and Bioimpedance Research Studies: A Scientometric Approach Using the Scopus Database," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Zhang, Chengzhi & Zhou, Qingqing, 2020. "Assessing books’ depth and breadth via multi-level mining on tables of contents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    18. Diogo Da Fonseca-Soares & Josicleda Domiciano Galvinicio & Sayonara Andrade Eliziário & Angel Fermin Ramos-Ridao, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of the Trends and Characteristics of Railway Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    19. Halevi, Gali & Moed, Henk & Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2017. "Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 823-834.
    20. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2175-2188, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11632-:d:916721. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.