Dieter Näf
- Cancer Research top 5%
- Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment 2
- Molecular Biology top 10%
- DNA Repair Mechanisms 9
- CRISPR and Genetic Engineering 6
- Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics 4
- Pluripotent Stem Cells Research 2
- Immunology top 10%
- interferon and immune responses 4
- Immune Response and Inflammation 3
- Oncology top 10%
- Cell Biology top 10%
- Microtubule and mitosis dynamics 3
- Co-authors
- Alan D. D’AndreaGary M. KupferIrene García-HigueraYanan KuangCharles WeissmannMichael A. PulsipherTakayuki YamashitaShigetaka Asano
- Journals
- Cell (1 paper)Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (4 papers)Nature Genetics (2 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesSwitzerlandJapan
In The Last Decade
Dieter Näf
23 papers receiving 1.4k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 83
- Cancer Research 424
- Molecular Biology 1.0k
- Immunology 301
- Oncology 298
- Cell Biology 146
Countries citing papers authored by Dieter Näf
This map shows the geographic impact of Dieter Näf'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 Dieter Näf with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dieter Näf more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Dieter Näf
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Dieter Näf. 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 Dieter Näf. The network helps show where Dieter Näf may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Dieter Näf, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2010 | 111 | |
| 2 | 2010 | 3 | |
| 3 | 2009 | 13 | |
| 4 | 2008 | 40 | |
| 5 | 2005 | 8 | |
| 6 | 2004 | 40 | |
| 7 | The Mouse Tumor Biology Database: a public resource for cancer genetics and pathology of the mouse. | 2002 | 40 |
| 8 | 2001 | 29 | |
| 9 | 2001 | 1 | |
| 10 | 2000 | 28 | |
| 11 | 1999 | 30 | |
| 12 | 1999 | 199 | |
| 13 | 1998 | 113 | |
| 14 | 1998 | 109 | |
| 15 | 1997 | 162 | |
| 16 | 1997 | 30 | |
| 17 | 1997 | 9 | |
| 18 | 1997 | 86 | |
| 19 | 1990 | 149 | |
| 20 | 1990 | 43 |
About Dieter Näf
Dieter Näf is a scholar working on Cancer Research, Immunology and Molecular Biology, having authored 23 papers that have together received 1.4k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include DNA Repair Mechanisms (9 papers), CRISPR and Genetic Engineering (6 papers), interferon and immune responses (4 papers), Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics (4 papers), Microtubule and mitosis dynamics (3 papers), Immune Response and Inflammation (3 papers), Pluripotent Stem Cells Research (2 papers) and Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cancer Research (424 citations), Molecular Biology (1.0k citations) and Immunology (301 citations). Dieter Näf has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Switzerland and Japan. Frequent co-authors include Alan D. D’Andrea, Gary M. Kupfer, Irene García-Higuera, Yanan Kuang, Charles Weissmann, Michael A. Pulsipher, Takayuki Yamashita, Shigetaka Asano, Heinz Ruffner and Kathleen F. Lambert. Their work appears in journals such as Cell, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and Nature Genetics.
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.