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.
EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: A CONSENSUS OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE
Countries citing papers authored by John H. Lawton
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of John H. Lawton'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 John H. Lawton with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John H. Lawton more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by John H. Lawton. 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 John H. Lawton. The network helps show where John H. Lawton may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of John H. Lawton
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of John H. Lawton.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of John H. Lawton 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 John H. Lawton. John H. Lawton 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.
Thomas, Jeremy A., Mark G. Telfer, David B. Roy, et al.. (2004). Comparative Losses of British Butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis. Science. 303(5665). 1879–1881.705 indexed citations breakdown →
Jones, T. Hefin, Т. Martijn Bezemer, Christian Körner, John H. Lawton, & L. J. Thompson. (2000). Comparing studies of artificial and natural ecosystem responses to CO2 enrichment.. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS). 29. 1–7.15 indexed citations
Awmack, C. S., R. Harrington, Simon R. Leather, & John H. Lawton. (1996). The impacts of elevated CO2 on aphid-plant interactions. Rothamsted Repository (Rothamsted Repository).30 indexed citations
Lewinsohn, Thomas M., et al.. (1995). First survey of insects feeding on Pteridium aquilinum in Brazil.. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia. 39(1). 151–156.4 indexed citations
Brown, V. K., John H. Lawton, & P. J. Grubb. (1991). Herbivory and the evolution of leaf size and shape. Discussion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences. 333(1267). 265–272.29 indexed citations
14.
Lawton, John H.. (1990). The U.K. biological control programme for bracken.. 34–39.1 indexed citations
15.
Lawton, John H., et al.. (1988). prospects of biological control of bracken in Britain. Aspects of applied biology.3 indexed citations
Thompson, Daniel J., et al.. (1984). The life history of Lestes sponsa (Hansemann): larval growth (Zygoptera: Lestidae). Odonatologica. 13(3). 451–459.24 indexed citations
18.
Nisbet, Roger M., et al.. (1983). The systematic formulation of tractable single-species models incorporating age structure. Journal of Animal Ecology. 52(2). 479–495.115 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.