Thea King
Impact in
- Endocrinology top 2%
- Escherichia coli research studies
- Genetics top 5%
- Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
- Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Genetic diversity and population structure
Papers in
- Genetics 9
- Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology 8
- Evolution and Genetic Dynamics 3
-
- Gene Regulatory Network Analysis 2
- Co-authors
- Thomas Ferenci (5 shared papers)Lucinda S. McRobb (1 shared paper)Megan J. Osmond-McLeod (2 shared papers)Lesley L. Duffy (2 shared papers)David J. Hetzel (1 shared paper)Michel Georges (1 shared paper)John S. Mattick (1 shared paper)S. S. Moore (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- Trends in Food Science & Technology (2 papers)PLoS ONE (2 papers)Molecular & Cellular Proteomics (2 papers)Journal of Bacteriology (2 papers)International Journal of Food Microbiology (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- AustraliaIrelandUnited States
In The Last Decade
Thea King
16 papers receiving 1.6k citations
Thea King's Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 128
- Endocrinology 172
- Genetics 593
- Food Science 336
- Biotechnology 157
- Molecular Biology 572
Countries citing papers authored by Thea King
This map shows the geographic impact of Thea King'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 Thea King with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Thea King more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Thea King
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Thea King. 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 Thea King. The network helps show where Thea King may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Thea King, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Food safety for food security: Relationship between global megatrends and developments in food safety Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 385 |
| 2 | 1991 | 355 | |
| 3 | 2002 | 203 | |
| 4 | 2004 | 150 | |
| 5 | 2018 | 128 | |
| 6 | 2017 | 86 | |
| 7 | 2010 | 83 | |
| 8 | 2011 | 63 | |
| 9 | 2006 | 43 | |
| 10 | 2014 | 34 | |
| 11 | 2002 | 27 | |
| 12 | 2008 | 23 | |
| 13 | 2005 | 22 | |
| 14 | 2014 | 17 | |
| 15 | 2016 | 15 | |
| 16 | 2019 | 9 |
About Thea King
Thea King is a scholar working on Genetics, Molecular Biology, Food Science, Biotechnology and Endocrinology, having authored 16 papers that have together received 1.6k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology (8 papers), Listeria monocytogenes in Food Safety (4 papers), Escherichia coli research studies (4 papers), Microbial Inactivation Methods (3 papers), Evolution and Genetic Dynamics (3 papers), Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications (2 papers), Food Safety and Hygiene (2 papers) and Gene Regulatory Network Analysis (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Endocrinology (172 citations), Genetics (593 citations), Food Science (336 citations), Biotechnology (157 citations) and Molecular Biology (572 citations). Thea King has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, Ireland and United States. Frequent co-authors include Thomas Ferenci, Lucinda S. McRobb, Megan J. Osmond-McLeod, Lesley L. Duffy, David J. Hetzel, Michel Georges, John S. Mattick, S. S. Moore, Jeremy P. Hill and Martin Cole. Their work appears in journals such as Trends in Food Science & Technology, PLoS ONE, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics, Journal of Bacteriology and International Journal of Food Microbiology.
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.