Pete Watt

20 papers receiving 487 citations

Peers

Pete Watt
Comparison fields: 5 of 56
  • Environmental Engineering 398
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 250
  • Insect Science 143
  • Geology 60
  • Ecology 205
Replace Matheus Boni Vicari with:
Matheus Boni Vicari United Kingdom
Lothar Eysn Austria
Olivier R. van Lier Canada
Louise Terryn Belgium
Toshiaki Owari Japan
Hudson Franklin Pessoa Veras Brazil
Ville Luoma Finland
Gabriel Atticciati Prata United States
Nian-Wei Ku United States
Martin Béland Canada
Pete Watt relative to Matheus Boni Vicari United Kingdom Matheus Boni Vicari's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×11×
Matheus Boni Vicari · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Pete Watt

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Pete Watt'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 Pete Watt with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Pete Watt more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Pete Watt

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Pete Watt. 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 Pete Watt. The network helps show where Pete Watt may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Pete Watt, 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 Pete Watt Line = papers co-authored together Pete Watt links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 21 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2007188
2 202057
3 201533
4 201428
5 201328
6 201526
7 201322
8 201322
9 201319
10 201616
11 201814
12 198914
13 202410
14 19808
15 20206
16 20245
17 20133
18 20132
19 20252
20 20201

About Pete Watt

Pete Watt is a scholar working on Environmental Engineering, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Insect Science, Global and Planetary Change and Ecology, having authored 21 papers that have together received 504 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications (15 papers), Forest ecology and management (12 papers), Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies (9 papers), Remote Sensing in Agriculture (4 papers), Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management (4 papers), Forest Management and Policy (2 papers), Fire effects on ecosystems (2 papers) and Tree Root and Stability Studies (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Environmental Engineering (398 citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (250 citations), Insect Science (143 citations), Geology (60 citations) and Ecology (205 citations). Pete Watt has collaborated with scholars based in New Zealand, United Kingdom and United States. Frequent co-authors include Daniel N.M. Donoghue, Michael S. Watt, Nicholas J. Cox, Jeremy D. Wilson, Jonathan P. Dash, Andrew Meredith, Matthew C. Hansen, Jeffrey Pickering, Nikolaos Galiatsatos and Thomas R. Adams. Their work appears in journals such as New Zealand journal of forestry science, Remote Sensing, Remote Sensing of Environment, Forest Ecology and Management and Forests.

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