Countries where authors publish in Microbial Genomics
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Microbial 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 Microbial Genomics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Microbial Genomics more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Microbial 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 Microbial Genomics.
About Microbial Genomics
The 1.5k papers published in Microbial Genomics in the last decades have received a total of 29.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Microbial Genomics usually cover Molecular Medicine (293 papers), Endocrinology (276 papers), Microbiology (161 papers), Clinical Biochemistry (127 papers) and Infectious Diseases (307 papers) specifically the topics of Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies (377 papers), Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria (293 papers), Bacteriophages and microbial interactions (214 papers), Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology (153 papers), Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing (124 papers), Vibrio bacteria research studies (110 papers), Gut microbiota and health (108 papers) and Pneumonia and Respiratory Infections (104 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Microbial Genomics are Kathryn E. Holt, James A. Robertson, John J. Nash, Ryan R. Wick, Claire L. Gorrie, Louise M. Judd, Andrew J. Page, Jacqueline A. Keane, Simon R. Harris and Kelly L. Wyres.
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.