Trends in biotechnology

338.8k citations
4.6k papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

    • Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
    • Enzyme Catalysis and Immobilization
    • Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
    • CRISPR and Genetic Engineering

Papers in

    • CRISPR and Genetic Engineering 468
    • Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction 418
    • Enzyme Catalysis and Immobilization 256
    • Viral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects 251
    • Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques 239
    • Transgenic Plants and Applications 190

Trends in biotechnology

4.2k papers receiving 322.7k citations

Peers

Trends in biotechnology
Comparison fields: 5 of 244
  • Biotechnology 22.4k
  • Molecular Biology 159.4k
  • Biomaterials 29.4k
  • Biomedical Engineering 88.1k
  • Pollution 15.3k
Replace Current Opinion in Biotechnology with:
Current Opinion in Biotechnology United States
Biotechnology Advances China
Journal of Biotechnology China
Biotechnology Letters China
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - General Subjects United States
BioMed Research International China
Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology China
Trends in Food Science & Technology China
Nature Protocols United States
Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics United States
Trends in biotechnology relative to Current Opinion in Biotechnology United States Current Opinion in Biotechnology's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×1.9×
Current Opinion in Biotechnology · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Trends in biotechnology

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published in Trends in biotechnology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Trends in biotechnology. 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 Trends in biotechnology.

About Trends in biotechnology

The 4.6k papers published in Trends in biotechnology in the last decades have received a total of 338.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Trends in biotechnology usually cover Molecular Biology (2.7k papers), Biotechnology (342 papers), Biomedical Engineering (943 papers), Business and International Management (34 papers) and Biomaterials (210 papers) specifically the topics of CRISPR and Genetic Engineering (468 papers), Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction (418 papers), Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research (274 papers), 3D Printing in Biomedical Research (266 papers), Enzyme Catalysis and Immobilization (256 papers), Viral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects (251 papers), Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques (239 papers) and Transgenic Plants and Applications (190 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Trends in biotechnology are Yusuf Chisti, Sang Yup Lee, Korneel Rabaey, Sergio Riva, Jin‐Woo Bae, Na-Ri Shin, Tae Woong Whon, Thomas Gaj, Carlos F. Barbas and Charles A. Gersbach.

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