Abstract
Chlorophyll fluorescence is the most widely used set of techniques to probe photosynthesis and plant stress. Its great versatility has given rise to different routine methods to study plants and algae. The three main technical platforms are pulse amplitude modulation (PAM), fast rise of chlorophyll fluorescence, and fast repetition rate. Solar-induced fluorescence (SIF) has also gained interest in the last few years. Works have compared their advantages and their underlying theory, with many arguments advanced as to which method is the most accurate and useful. To date, no data has assessed the exact magnitude of popularity and influence for each methodology. In this work, we have taken the bibliometrics of the past decade for each of the four platforms, have evaluated the public scientific opinion toward each method, and possibly identified a geographical bias. We used various metrics to assess influence and popularity for the four routine platforms compared in this study and found that, overall, PAM currently has the highest values, although the more recent SIF has increased in popularity rapidly during the last decade. This indicates that PAM is currently one of the fundamental tools in chlorophyll fluorescence.