Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Some Ecological Consequences of a Computer Model of Forest Growth
Countries citing papers authored by Daniel B. Botkin
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Daniel B. Botkin'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 Daniel B. Botkin with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Daniel B. Botkin more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Daniel B. Botkin
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel B. Botkin. 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 Daniel B. Botkin. The network helps show where Daniel B. Botkin may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Daniel B. Botkin
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Daniel B. Botkin.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Daniel B. Botkin 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 Daniel B. Botkin. Daniel B. Botkin is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Bockstoce, John R., et al.. (2021). The Geographic Distribution of Bowhead Whales, Balaena mysticetus, in the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas: Evidence from Whaleship Records, 1849–1914. AquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization).1 indexed citations
Botkin, Daniel B.. (2001). The naturalness of biological invasions. Western North American Naturalist. 61(3). 3.25 indexed citations
8.
Lindenmayer, David B., Chris Margules, & Daniel B. Botkin. (2000). Indicators of Biodiversity for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management. Conservation Biology. 14(4). 941–950.718 indexed citations breakdown →
9.
Sedjo, Roger A., et al.. (1998). Commentary: Forest Plantations. Environment Science and Policy for Sustainable Development. 40(1). 5–5.6 indexed citations
10.
Botkin, Daniel B.. (1996). Adjusting Law to Nature’s Discordant Harmonies. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum. 7(1). 25–38.6 indexed citations
11.
Botkin, Daniel B., Lloyd G. Simpson, & H. Jochen Schenk. (1992). Estimating Biomass. Science. 257(5067). 146–146.2 indexed citations
Botkin, Daniel B. & Lloyd G. Simpson. (1990). Biomass of the North American Boreal Forest A step toward accurate global measures. Biogeochemistry. 9(2). 161–174.77 indexed citations
14.
Estes, John E., et al.. (1984). IMPROVING ACCURACIES OF GLOBAL LAND COVER ESTIMATES USING LANDSAT IMAGERY.. 368–378.1 indexed citations
Miller, Richard S. & Daniel B. Botkin. (1974). Endangered Species: Models and Predictions. American Scientist. 62(2). 172–181.34 indexed citations
19.
Botkin, Daniel B. & Richard S. Miller. (1974). Complex Ecosystems: Models and Predictions. American Scientist. 62(4). 448–453.4 indexed citations
20.
Miller, Richard S., et al.. (1972). A Simulation Model for the Management of Sandhill Cranes.11 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.