G. Prota

88 papers receiving 2.1k citations

Peers

G. Prota
Comparison fields: 5 of 111
  • Cell Biology 1.2k
  • Dermatology 489
  • Biochemistry 227
  • Nutrition and Dietetics 541
  • Sensory Systems 136
Replace Miles R. Chedekel with:
Miles R. Chedekel United States
Giuseppe Prota Italy
Giovanna Misuraca Italy
Madhu A. Pathak United States
M.A. Pathak United States
Stefania Briganti Italy
Yong‐Doo Park China
Igor A. Butovich United States
Susan N. Marshall New Zealand
T.T. Tchen United States
G. Prota relative to Miles R. Chedekel United States Miles R. Chedekel's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Miles R. Chedekel · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by G. Prota

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of G. Prota's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by G. Prota with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites G. Prota more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by G. Prota

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by G. Prota. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by G. Prota. The network helps show where G. Prota may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside G. Prota, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with G. Prota Line = papers co-authored together G. Prota links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 88 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1977167
2 1982161
3 1987132
4 1976130
5 1982113
6 199893
7 199592
8 196490
9 199264
10 198057
11 198553
12 196550
13 199147
14 197047
15 198045
16 198243
17 198541
18 197639
19 199330
20
Some new aspects of eumelanin chemistry.
198830

About G. Prota

G. Prota is a scholar working on Cell Biology, Organic Chemistry, Molecular Biology, Nutrition and Dietetics and Dermatology, having authored 88 papers that have together received 2.3k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include melanin and skin pigmentation (34 papers), Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques (14 papers), Skin Protection and Aging (13 papers), Phenothiazines and Benzothiazines Synthesis and Activities (7 papers), Marine Sponges and Natural Products (7 papers), bioluminescence and chemiluminescence research (6 papers), Bioactive Compounds and Antitumor Agents (6 papers) and Synthesis and Characterization of Heterocyclic Compounds (6 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cell Biology (1.2k citations), Dermatology (489 citations), Biochemistry (227 citations), Nutrition and Dietetics (541 citations) and Sensory Systems (136 citations). G. Prota has collaborated with scholars based in Italy, France and United States. Frequent co-authors include Marco d’Ischia, Shosuke Ito, Giovanna Misuraca, Anna Palumbo, Luigi Minale, Mario Piattelli, James S. Hyde, I. A. Menon, Roger C. Sealy and Christopher C. Felix. Their work appears in journals such as Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, Tetrahedron, Melanoma Research, Tetrahedron Letters and Archives of Dermatological Research.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact