Thomas M. Boyce

845 citations
8 papers · 660 · h-index 8

Impact in

Papers in

Thomas M. Boyce

8 papers receiving 636 citations

Peers

Thomas M. Boyce
Comparison fields: 5 of 67
  • Insect Science 160
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 172
  • Genetics 153
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics 101
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 97
Replace D. M. MacLeod with:
D. M. MacLeod Canada
Kyoko Aoki Japan
Jeffrey H. Chung United States
Jeroen van Dijk Netherlands
Thierry Labbé France
Juan P. Ianowski Canada
Jonathan Price United Kingdom
John F. Doane Canada
D Nolte South Africa
Hamish Jackson Australia
Thomas M. Boyce relative to D. M. MacLeod Canada D. M. MacLeod's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×10×15×19.1×
D. M. MacLeod · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Thomas M. Boyce

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Thomas M. Boyce

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Thomas M. Boyce. 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 Thomas M. Boyce. The network helps show where Thomas M. Boyce may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 11 scholars most cited alongside Thomas M. Boyce, 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 Thomas M. Boyce Line = papers co-authored together Thomas M. Boyce links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

8 of 8 papers shown
#Work
1 1990222
2 1989196
3 199374
4 199152
5 199535
6 199631
7 199528
8 200022

About Thomas M. Boyce

Thomas M. Boyce is a scholar working on Molecular Biology, Pharmacology, Genetics, Insect Science and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, having authored 8 papers that have together received 660 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases (3 papers), Genetic diversity and population structure (3 papers), Insect Resistance and Genetics (2 papers), Plant and animal studies (2 papers), Insect and Pesticide Research (2 papers), Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics (1 paper), Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes (1 paper) and Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Insect Science (160 citations), Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (172 citations), Genetics (153 citations), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (101 citations) and Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (97 citations). Thomas M. Boyce has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, United States and Netherlands. Frequent co-authors include Charles F. Aquadro, Michael E. Zwick, Mario S. Verani, J J Mahmarian, John G. Oakeshott, Andrew V. Z. Brower, R.J. Russell, Marion J. Healy, Robyn J. Russell and Richard D. Newcomb. Their work appears in journals such as Circulation, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Genetics, Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and Genetica.

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