C. Smith

1.8k total citations
55 papers, 1.5k citations indexed

About

C. Smith is a scholar working on Genetics, Agronomy and Crop Science and Animal Science and Zoology. According to data from OpenAlex, C. Smith has authored 55 papers receiving a total of 1.5k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 49 papers in Genetics, 26 papers in Agronomy and Crop Science and 10 papers in Animal Science and Zoology. Recurrent topics in C. Smith's work include Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock (49 papers), Reproductive Physiology in Livestock (20 papers) and Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals (13 papers). C. Smith is often cited by papers focused on Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock (49 papers), Reproductive Physiology in Livestock (20 papers) and Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals (13 papers). C. Smith collaborates with scholars based in Canada, United Kingdom and Czechia. C. Smith's co-authors include E.W. Brascamp, A. Nejati‐Javaremi, John P. Gibson, B.T. Wolf, D. I. Sales, M. Quinton, J. W. James, Michael E. Goddard, Chris Haley and D. R. Guy and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Journal of Dairy Science and Journal of Animal Science.

In The Last Decade

C. Smith

53 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
C. Smith Canada	20	1.3k	463	397	308	173	55	1.5k
B.G. Cassell United States	24	1.3k 1.0×	920 2.0×	376 0.9×	164 0.5×	213 1.2×	77	1.6k
R. M. Bourdon United States	20	1.0k 0.8×	669 1.4×	307 0.8×	204 0.7×	123 0.7×	27	1.3k
T. C. Cartwright United States	26	1.5k 1.2×	1.1k 2.3×	623 1.6×	209 0.7×	116 0.7×	102	2.0k
R.L. Powell United States	19	916 0.7×	467 1.0×	236 0.6×	197 0.6×	101 0.6×	90	1.0k
W.E. Vinson United States	21	948 0.8×	726 1.6×	324 0.8×	164 0.5×	225 1.3×	80	1.2k
J. S. Brinks United States	24	1.6k 1.2×	1.1k 2.4×	458 1.2×	302 1.0×	179 1.0×	69	1.9k
M. W. Tess United States	20	720 0.6×	448 1.0×	453 1.1×	103 0.3×	212 1.2×	63	1.1k
B J Van Doormaal Canada	14	1.2k 1.0×	804 1.7×	428 1.1×	179 0.6×	172 1.0×	33	1.3k
E.W. Brascamp Netherlands	25	1.8k 1.4×	239 0.5×	638 1.6×	380 1.2×	286 1.7×	76	2.2k
Birgit Fuerst‐Waltl Austria	22	975 0.8×	744 1.6×	487 1.2×	109 0.4×	327 1.9×	113	1.4k

Countries citing papers authored by C. Smith

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by C. Smith

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by C. Smith. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by C. Smith. The network helps show where C. Smith may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of C. Smith

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of C. Smith. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of C. Smith based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with C. Smith. C. Smith is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

20 of 20 papers shown

Smith, C., Eric R. Morgan, & Rhys Aled Jones. (2024). Environmental influences on the distribution and ecology of the fluke intermediate host Galba truncatula: a systematic review. Parasitology. 151(11). 1201–1224. 2 indexed citations

Smith, C.. (2024). Have Your Cake and Eat It Too. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 18(1).

Nejati‐Javaremi, A., C. Smith, & John P. Gibson. (1997). Effect of total allelic relationship on accuracy of evaluation and response to selection.. Journal of Animal Science. 75(7). 1738–1738. 180 indexed citations

Amer, P.R., et al.. (1994). A bioeconomic model for comparing beef cattle genotypes at their optimal economic slaughter end point. Journal of Animal Science. 72(1). 38–50. 29 indexed citations

Smith, C., et al.. (1994). Genetic Response and Inbreeding with Different Selection Methods and Mating Designs for Nucleus Breeding Programs of Dairy Cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. 77(6). 1702–1718. 23 indexed citations

Kuhlers, D. L., G.R. McDANIEL, C. Smith, et al.. (1994). Estimates of genetic variances and covariances between tibial dyschondroplasia and weight at two ages in broilers from a designed selection experiment.. 57–59. 2 indexed citations

Smith, C., et al.. (1993). Deterministic genetic analysis of open nucleus breeding schemes for dairy cattle in developing countries. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 110(1-6). 194–208. 19 indexed citations

Smith, C., et al.. (1993). The effects of genotype by environment interactions in dairy cattle open nucleus breeding schemes. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 110(1-6). 186–193. 4 indexed citations

Smith, C., et al.. (1993). Optimized testing schemes using nucleus progeny, adult MOET siblings, or juvenile MOET pedigrees in dairy cattle closed populations. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 110(1-6). 30–40. 9 indexed citations

10.

Smith, C., et al.. (1993). MOET results from a dispersed hybrid nucleus programme in dairy cattle. Animal Production. 57(3). 369–378. 16 indexed citations

11.

Cantet, R. J. C., L.R. Schaeffer, & C. Smith. (1992). Reduced animal model with differential genetic grouping for direct and maternal effects1. Journal of Animal Science. 70(6). 1730–1741. 5 indexed citations

12.

Quinton, M., C. Smith, & Michael E. Goddard. (1992). Comparison of selection methods at the same level of inbreeding. Journal of Animal Science. 70(4). 1060–1067. 107 indexed citations

13.

Keller, D.S., et al.. (1990). A comparison of factors reducing selection response in closed nucleus breeding schemes.. Journal of Animal Science. 68(6). 1553–1561. 24 indexed citations

14.

Smith, C., et al.. (1989). Multiple Ovulation and Embryo Manipulation in the Improvement of Beef Cattle: Relative Theoretical Rates of Genetic Change. Journal of Animal Science. 67(11). 2863–2871. 17 indexed citations

15.

Woolliams, John & C. Smith. (1988). The value of indicator traits in the genetic improvement of dairy cattle. Animal Production. 46(3). 333–345. 55 indexed citations

16.

Smith, C.. (1986). Variety of breeding stocks for the production-marketing range, and for flexibility and uncertainty.. Proceedings of the World Congress on Genetics applied to Livestock Production. 14–22. 5 indexed citations

17.

Cameron, N. D., et al.. (1984). Performance of lambs from three crossbred ewe types. Animal Science. 39(1). 81–87. 2 indexed citations

18.

Jones, R. G., et al.. (1980). A note on a comparison of crossbreds from two prolific sheep breeds. Animal Science. 31(3). 323–325. 5 indexed citations

19.

Wolf, B.T., C. Smith, & D. I. Sales. (1980). Growth and carcass composition in the crossbred progeny of six terminal sire breeds of sheep. Animal Science. 31(3). 307–313. 101 indexed citations

20.

Omar, Ibrahim Che, Carlos Manuel Arriaga-Jordán, & C. Smith. (1977). A note on effects of lambing at one year and farm production level on the performance of prolific ewes. Animal Science. 25(3). 389–392. 2 indexed citations

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact