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.
The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2015. Version 12.23.2015
2017343 citationsDaniel K. Niven, William A. Link et al.USGS DOI Tool Production Environmentprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Daniel K. Niven
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Daniel K. Niven'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 K. Niven with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Daniel K. Niven more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel K. Niven. 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 K. Niven. The network helps show where Daniel K. Niven may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Daniel K. Niven
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Daniel K. Niven.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Daniel K. Niven 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 K. Niven. Daniel K. Niven is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Niven, Daniel K., et al.. (2017). The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2015. Version 12.23.2015. USGS DOI Tool Production Environment.343 indexed citations breakdown →
6.
Sauer, John R., Daniel K. Niven, William A. Link, & Gregory S. Butcher. (2010). Analysis and summary of Christmas Bird Count data. 33.2 indexed citations
Butcher, G.S., Gregory S. Butcher, & Daniel K. Niven. (2007). Combining Data from the Christmas Bird Count and the Breeding Bird Survey to Determine the Continental Status and Trends of North America Birds.49 indexed citations
Butcher, G.S., Daniel K. Niven, & John R. Sauer. (2005). Using Christmas Bird Count data to assess population dynamics and trends of waterbirds. 59. 23–25.13 indexed citations
13.
Wells, Jeffrey V., et al.. (2005). The Important Bird Areas Program in the United States: building a network of sites for conservation, state by state. 191.3 indexed citations
14.
Niven, Daniel K., John R. Sauer, & G.S. Butcher. (2005). Population trends of North American sea ducks based on Christmas Bird Count and Breeding Bird Survey data.1 indexed citations
15.
Niven, Daniel K., John R. Sauer, G.S. Butcher, & William A. Link. (2004). Christmas Bird Count provides insights into population change in land birds that breed in the boreal forest. 58. 10–20.53 indexed citations
16.
Link, William A., et al.. (2004). Statistical analyses make the Christmas Bird Count relevant for conservation. 58. 21–25.7 indexed citations
17.
Niven, Daniel K.. (1996). A comparison of the ecology and population dynamics of a neotropical migrant landbird, the hooded warbler, in winter and summer.2 indexed citations
18.
Niven, Daniel K.. (1993). Male-Male Nesting Behavior in Hooded Warblers. Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida).1 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.