Fundo Brasil

13.6k citations
1.2k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Fundo Brasil

969 papers receiving 12.7k citations

Peers

Fundo Brasil
Comparison fields: 5 of 232
  • Ecological Modeling 710
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 1.7k
  • Global and Planetary Change 2.0k
  • Ecology 2.2k
  • Forestry 297
Replace Universidade Vila Velha with:
Universidade Vila Velha Brazil
Fundação Instituto de Pesca do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Brazil
Elabora Consultoria (Brazil) Brazil
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo Brazil
Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa Santa Casa Brazil
Companhia Energética de São Paulo Brazil
Hospital Bandeirantes Brazil
Universidade Santa Cecília Brazil
Universidade Veiga de Almeida Brazil
Faculdades Integradas de São Paulo Brazil
Fundo Brasil relative to Universidade Vila Velha Brazil Universidade Vila Velha's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.3×
Universidade Vila Velha · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Fundo Brasil

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Fundo Brasil. 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 papers produced at Fundo Brasil with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Fundo Brasil more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at Fundo Brasil

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Fundo Brasil at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with Fundo Brasil at the time of their publication.

About Fundo Brasil

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Fundo Brasil have published 1.2k papers, which have received a total of 13.6k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 92 papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation, 30 papers in Ecological Modeling, 27 papers in Forestry, 110 papers in Ecology and 26 papers in Parasitology on the topics of Turtle Biology and Conservation (36 papers), Species Distribution and Climate Change (30 papers), Wildlife Ecology and Conservation (29 papers), Education Pedagogy and Practices (29 papers), Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (27 papers), Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management (27 papers), Growth and nutrition in plants (27 papers) and Soil Management and Crop Yield (26 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Ecological Modeling (710 citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (1.7k citations), Global and Planetary Change (2.0k citations), Ecology (2.2k citations) and Forestry (297 citations). Authors at Fundo Brasil collaborate with scholars in Brazil, United States and Portugal and have published in prestigious journals including Cadernos de Saúde Pública, Biological Conservation, Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research and Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinária/Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Parasitology. Some of Fundo Brasil's most productive authors include Fábio Rúbio Scarano, Rafael Loyola, Leopoldo de Meis, Denize Grzybovski, Britaldo Soares‐Filho, Aliny P. F. Pires, Anelise Rebelato Mozzato, Bernardo B. N. Strassburg, Agnieszka E. Latawiec and Thomas M. Brooks.

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 institutions with similar magnitude of impact