The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management
Impact in
- Insect Science 896
- Plant Science 701
Classified as
- Journal
- Annual Review of Entomology
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091407 →Countries where authors are citing The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management
This map shows the geographic impact of The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management. 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 The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management
This network shows the impact of The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management.
About The Use of Push-Pull Strategies in Integrated Pest Management
This paper, published in 2006, received 1.3k indexed citations . Written by Samantha M. Cook, Zeyaur Rahman Khan and John Anthony Pickett covering the research area of Ecology and Insect Science. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Insect Science (896 citations), Plant Science (701 citations), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (252 citations), Ecology (175 citations) and Molecular Biology (143 citations). Published in Annual Review of Entomology.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091407.