Peter D. Crittenden served as senior editor of The Lichenologist, the flagship journal in the field of lichenological research, for a period of two decades, between 2000 and 2019. A review of the development of the journal and the publication output during this period is provided. The number of papers published during this period (1197) matches that of all papers published under the three previous senior editors, Peter W. James, David L. Hawksworth and Dennis H. Brown, during a much longer period of 42 years from 1958 to 1999. Peter oversaw important editorial changes to the layout and content of the journal: an increased size with a modern cover design, leaving behind the classic mint-coloured cover of more than 40 years; the addition of ‘thematic issues’ and encouragement of large monographs; implementation of substantial changes to the Code, such as effective electronic publication and obligate registration of new fungal names; and more recently a new policy to reject so-called ‘single naked species descriptions’. Shortly before Peter took over as senior editor, The Lichenologist had received its first impact factor, and Peter managed to continuously increase this measure from around 0.9 to lately up to over 1.5, higher than most other competing journals. The 1197 papers between 2000 and 2019 were published by a total of 1138 different authors, more than half of whom appeared just once as author, whereas a small number participated in numerous (up to 93) papers. There was a continuous increase in the mean number of authors per paper per year, from below 2.5 to around 3.5, the highest numbers ranging between 11 and 30; still, c. 75% of all papers between 2000 and 2019 were single-authored or had up to three authors. Based on affiliations at the time of publication, two thirds of author contributions came from Europe (66%), 13% from North America, 9% from Asia and 7% from Latin America. Likewise, almost half of the study areas were located in Europe and around 10% each in North America, South America and Asia. The countries with the highest number of studies included, in descending order, the United States, Spain, the United Kingdom, Norway and Sweden. North America and Europe were over-represented in terms of author contributions, whereas Africa, Latin America, Australia and Oceania were over-represented in terms of study areas. The 1197 papers analyzed encompassed a broad diversity of topics, classified into 32 categories. Taxonomy of lichenized fungi was the most frequent component, representing the focal point in almost half of all studies, followed by phylogeny and evolution, ecology, and the taxonomy of lichenicolous fungi. Around two thirds of the currently accepted genera of lichenized fungi were treated, with a significant correlation between known species richness and the number of papers in which a genus was treated, underlining the taxonomic representativity of papers published in the journal during the past two decades. Examples of genera that were treated more frequently than expected included commonly studied model organisms, such as Lobaria, and those frequently featured in ecological or other non-taxonomic studies, such as Xanthoria. Species-rich tropical genera, particularly in the Graphidaceae, were generally under-represented. Mean number of authors per paper per volume and total number of country origins of authors per volume were the best predictors of impact factor, followed by diversity of study countries per volume, mean number of study countries per paper per volume, mean number of topics per paper per volume, and proportion of studies with phylogenetic components per volume. Individual papers that contributed to high impact factors included broad-scale revisionary treatments and worldwide keys to species-rich taxa, substantial phylogenetic reclassifications of known taxonomic groups, papers dealing with novel methodological approaches of broad interest, and broad-scale studies related to environmental change and lichen biomonitoring.

中文翻译：

---

Peter D. Crittenden：作为地衣学旗舰期刊 The Lichenologist 高级编辑的两年非凡任期的荟萃分析

Peter D. Crittenden 担任高级编辑地衣学家, 地衣学研究领域的旗舰期刊，从 2000 年到 2019 年，为期两年。在此期间发表的论文数量（1197 篇）与前三位高级编辑 Peter W. James、David L. Hawksworth 和 Dennis H. Brown 在从 1958 年到 42 年的更长时期内发表的所有论文的数量相当1999 年，Peter 监督了期刊布局和内容的重要编辑修改：增加了现代封面设计的规模，摒弃了 40 多年的经典薄荷色封面；增加“主题问题”并鼓励出版大型专着；实施重大变革代码，例如有效的电子出版物和新真菌名称的义务注册；最近还有一项拒绝所谓的“单一裸物种描述”的新政策。在彼得接任高级编辑前不久，地衣学家获得了第一个影响因子，Peter 设法将这一指标从 0.9 左右不断提高到最近超过 1.5，高于大多数其他竞争期刊。2000 年至 2019 年的 1197 篇论文共由 1138 位不同作者发表，其中一半以上仅以作者身份出现过一次，而少数人参与了大量（多达 93 篇）论文。每年每篇论文的平均作者人数不断增加，从不到 2.5 人增加到 3.5 人左右，最高数字在 11 到 30 人之间；仍然，C. 2000 年至 2019 年期间，75% 的论文为单人作者或最多三位作者。根据出版时的隶属关系，三分之二的作者投稿来自欧洲（66%），13% 来自北美，9% 来自亚洲，7% 来自拉丁美洲。同样，几乎一半的研究区域位于欧洲，北美、南美和亚洲各占 10%。研究数量最多的国家依次为美国、西班牙、英国、挪威和瑞典。就作者贡献而言，北美和欧洲的比例过高，而在研究领域方面，非洲、拉丁美洲、澳大利亚和大洋洲的比例过高。分析的 1197 篇论文涵盖了广泛多样的主题，分为 32 个类别。地衣真菌分类学是最常见的组成部分，几乎占所有研究的焦点，其次是系统发育和进化、生态学和地衣真菌分类学。目前接受的地衣真菌属中约有三分之二得到处理，已知物种丰富度与处理该属的论文数量之间存在显着相关性，强调了过去二十年发表在该期刊上的论文的分类代表性。比预期更频繁地处理的属的例子包括通常研究的模式生物，例如 目前接受的地衣真菌属中约有三分之二得到处理，已知物种丰富度与处理该属的论文数量之间存在显着相关性，强调了过去二十年发表在该期刊上的论文的分类代表性。比预期更频繁地处理的属的例子包括通常研究的模式生物，例如 目前接受的地衣真菌属中约有三分之二得到处理，已知物种丰富度与处理该属的论文数量之间存在显着相关性，强调了过去二十年发表在该期刊上的论文的分类代表性。比预期更频繁地处理的属的例子包括通常研究的模式生物，例如洛巴利亚，以及那些在生态学或其他非分类学研究中经常出现的特征，例如黄花菜. 物种丰富的热带属，特别是在葫芦科, 一般代表性不足。每卷每篇论文的平均作者数和每卷作者的国家来源总数是影响因子的最佳预测指标，其次是每卷研究国家的多样性、每卷每篇论文的平均研究国家数、每卷平均主题数每卷的论文，以及每卷具有系统发育成分的研究比例。对高影响因子做出贡献的个别论文包括大规模修正处理和世界范围内物种丰富分类群的关键、已知分类群的大量系统发育重新分类、涉及广泛感兴趣的新方法学方法的论文以及与环境变化相关的大规模研究和地衣生物监测。