Stephen D. Lorimer

842 citations
28 papers · 732 · h-index 15

Impact in

Papers in

Stephen D. Lorimer

27 papers receiving 684 citations

Peers

Stephen D. Lorimer
Comparison fields: 5 of 83
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics 391
  • Plant Science 362
  • Pharmacology 89
  • Pharmacology 46
  • Complementary and alternative medicine 41
Replace Anna K. Picman with:
Anna K. Picman Canada
Nattawut Rungjindamai Thailand
George Sturtz United States
Peter B. Oelrichs Australia
Helmut Besl Germany
Thitiya Boonpratuang Thailand
Palle Friis Denmark
Tapas Kumar Bandyopadhyay India
Alberto A. Gurni Argentina
Buğrahan Emsen Türkiye
Stephen D. Lorimer relative to Anna K. Picman Canada Anna K. Picman's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×4.2×
Anna K. Picman · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen D. Lorimer

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen D. Lorimer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen D. Lorimer. 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 Stephen D. Lorimer. The network helps show where Stephen D. Lorimer may publish in the future.

Co-authors

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 28 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1999114
2 200265
3 199660
4 201958
5 199949
6 199344
7 199642
8 198736
9 199430
10 199628
11 200223
12 200122
13 199720
14 199516
15 200516
16 200314
17 199612
18 200512
19 199611
20 200311

About Stephen D. Lorimer

Stephen D. Lorimer is a scholar working on Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Plant Science, Insect Science, Biochemistry and Complementary and alternative medicine, having authored 28 papers that have together received 732 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Bryophyte Studies and Records (14 papers), Botany and Plant Ecology Studies (12 papers), Lichen and fungal ecology (8 papers), Traditional and Medicinal Uses of Annonaceae (2 papers), Plant and animal studies (2 papers), Sesquiterpenes and Asteraceae Studies (2 papers), Natural Compound Pharmacology Studies (2 papers) and Plant Toxicity and Pharmacological Properties (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (391 citations), Plant Science (362 citations), Pharmacology (89 citations), Pharmacology (46 citations) and Complementary and alternative medicine (41 citations). Stephen D. Lorimer has collaborated with scholars based in New Zealand, Canada and Germany. Frequent co-authors include Nigel Brian Perry, Elaine J. Burgess, Raymond S. Tangney, Rex T. Weavers, Lysa M. Foster, Michael H Benn, Nerida J. Brennan, Gill Ellis, David John Galloway and Jochen M. Scher. Their work appears in journals such as Phytochemistry, Journal of Natural Products, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Planta Medica and The Lichenologist.

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