Countries where authors publish in Weed Technology
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Weed Technology. 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 Weed Technology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Weed Technology more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Weed Technology. 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 Weed Technology.
About Weed Technology
The 4.9k papers published in Weed Technology in the last decades have received a total of 92.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Weed Technology usually cover Pollution (1.5k papers), Plant Science (4.4k papers), Agronomy and Crop Science (1.1k papers), Environmental Chemistry (554 papers) and Soil Science (315 papers) specifically the topics of Weed Control and Herbicide Applications (3.7k papers), Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies (1.5k papers), Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems (943 papers), Allelopathy and phytotoxic interactions (699 papers), Turfgrass Adaptation and Management (519 papers), Legume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis (474 papers), Plant Disease Management Techniques (360 papers) and Soybean genetics and cultivation (355 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Weed Technology are Jason K. Norsworthy, Hugh J. Beckie, John W. Wilcut, E. Patrick Fuerst, William G. Johnson, Krishna N. Reddy, Bryan G. Young, Larry W. Mitich, Stephen B. Powles and Alan C. York.
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.