Daniel C. Peck

879 citations
45 papers · 578 · h-index 14

Impact in

Papers in

Daniel C. Peck

43 papers receiving 543 citations

Peers

Daniel C. Peck
Comparison fields: 5 of 55
  • Insect Science 359
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics 206
  • Plant Science 177
  • Environmental Chemistry 45
  • Forestry 17
Replace Ronald Cherry with:
Ronald Cherry United States
Mika Yasuda Japan
J. C. Sousa-Silva Brazil
Michael J. Grodowitz United States
M.U. Schmidt Germany
Hideki Kagata Japan
R. Sundararaj India
H. A. Cordo United States
Micaela Buteler Argentina
Adam Powell United Kingdom
Daniel C. Peck relative to Ronald Cherry United States Ronald Cherry's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×4×5.7×
Ronald Cherry · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Daniel C. Peck

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Daniel C. Peck

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel C. Peck. 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 C. Peck. The network helps show where Daniel C. Peck may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Daniel C. Peck, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Daniel C. Peck Line = papers co-authored together Daniel C. Peck links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 45 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 200965
2 201352
3 200244
4 200937
5 200836
6 200734
7 200033
8 199822
9 199922
10 200519
11 200818
12 200116
13 200415
14 200915
15 200913
16 201012
17 200411
18 201010
19 19989
20 20049

About Daniel C. Peck

Daniel C. Peck is a scholar working on Insect Science, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Ecology, Environmental Chemistry and Plant Science, having authored 45 papers that have together received 578 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Insect-Plant Interactions and Control (16 papers), Forest Insect Ecology and Management (13 papers), Hemiptera Insect Studies (13 papers), Insect and Pesticide Research (10 papers), Phytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens (9 papers), Entomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest Control (8 papers), Diptera species taxonomy and behavior (5 papers) and Turfgrass Adaptation and Management (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Insect Science (359 citations), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (206 citations), Plant Science (177 citations), Environmental Chemistry (45 citations) and Forestry (17 citations). Daniel C. Peck has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Colombia and Mexico. Frequent co-authors include Federico J. Holmann, Matthew J. Petersen, Richard S. Parnas, Chenze Qi, Fujian Liu, Iman Noshadi, Anmin Zheng, Yao Lin, Evelyn J. Walsh and Douglas W. Tallamy. Their work appears in journals such as Pest Management Science, Journal of Integrated Pest Management, Environmental Entomology, Annals of the Entomological Society of America and Journal of Economic Entomology.

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