Comparative and Functional Genomics

8.7k citations
436 papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

    • Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
    • Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
    • Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
    • RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
    • Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
    • Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
    • Gene expression and cancer classification
    • Fungal and yeast genetics research

Papers in

    • Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies 99
    • Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks 70
    • Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies 61
    • Gene expression and cancer classification 59
    • RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms 58
    • Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction 25

Comparative and Functional Genomics

415 papers receiving 8.3k citations

Peers

Comparative and Functional Genomics
Comparison fields: 5 of 189
  • Molecular Biology 5.6k
  • Aging 101
  • Plant Science 1.9k
  • Genetics 1.0k
  • Microbiology 178
Replace BMC Biochemistry with:
BMC Biochemistry United States
Biological Procedures Online United States
BioMolecular Concepts United States
Drug Discovery Today Technologies United States
Annual Review of Food Science and Technology United States
Progress in molecular and subcellular biology United States
BMC Structural Biology United States
Current Protocols in Protein Science United States
WIREs Systems Biology and Medicine United States
Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology United States
Comparative and Functional Genomics relative to BMC Biochemistry United States BMC Biochemistry's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
BMC Biochemistry · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Comparative and Functional Genomics

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Comparative and Functional Genomics. 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 published in Comparative and Functional Genomics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Comparative and Functional Genomics more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics.

About Comparative and Functional Genomics

The 436 papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics in the last decades have received a total of 8.7k indexed citations . Papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics usually cover Molecular Biology (355 papers), Genetics (78 papers), Aging (4 papers), Plant Science (71 papers) and Parasitology (9 papers) specifically the topics of Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies (99 papers), Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks (70 papers), Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies (61 papers), Gene expression and cancer classification (59 papers), RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms (58 papers), Chromosomal and Genetic Variations (31 papers), Semantic Web and Ontologies (26 papers) and Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction (25 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Comparative and Functional Genomics are Oliver Fiehn, Alexa T. McCray, Edward R. Dougherty, Chris Mungall, Yusuf Tutar, Laurence Wurth, Francesco L. Brancia, Javier Paz‐Ares, John F. Allen and Jo Wixon.

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact