Countries where authors publish in Botanical studies
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Botanical studies. 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 Botanical studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Botanical studies more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Botanical studies. 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 Botanical studies.
About Botanical studies
The 840 papers published in Botanical studies in the last decades have received a total of 14.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Botanical studies usually cover Plant Science (312 papers), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (159 papers), Molecular Biology (249 papers), Horticulture (3 papers) and Pharmacology (44 papers) specifically the topics of Plant and Fungal Species Descriptions (93 papers), Plant Diversity and Evolution (77 papers), Plant and animal studies (53 papers), Plant Stress Responses and Tolerance (40 papers), Plant Parasitism and Resistance (36 papers), Plant tissue culture and regeneration (36 papers), Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases (33 papers) and Plant Molecular Biology Research (32 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Botanical studies are Katrin Viehweger, Michael F. Fay, Edward C. Yeung, Ching‐I Peng, Tian-Ming Yen, Vinay Sharma, Nilima Kumari, Pooja Parmar, Paulo J.C. Favas and Kuo‐Fang Chung.
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.