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.
Biomineralization: Integrating mechanism and evolutionary history
2022177 citationsBenjamin Gilbert, Kristin Bergmann et al.Science Advancesprofile →
Author Peers
Peers are selected by citation overlap in the author's most active subfields.
citations ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Jonathan Erez'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 Jonathan Erez with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jonathan Erez more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jonathan Erez. 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 Jonathan Erez. The network helps show where Jonathan Erez may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jonathan Erez
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jonathan Erez.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jonathan Erez 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 Jonathan Erez. Jonathan Erez is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Evans, D., et al.. (2018). Towards calcification site and seawater carbonate chemistry reconstruction from boron incorporation into large benthic foraminifera. AGUFM. 2018.1 indexed citations
Erez, Jonathan, et al.. (2010). The use of the fluorescent probe Calcein to study biomineralization processes in foraminifera.. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts. 9318.2 indexed citations
Erez, Jonathan, et al.. (2008). A novel carbon concentrating mechanism for foraminiferal calcification and its potential effects on paleoceanographic proxies. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. 72(12).3 indexed citations
Bentov, Shmuel, et al.. (2004). Direct Microelectrodes Measurements at the Calcification Site of Foraminifera. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2004.4 indexed citations
16.
Erez, Jonathan, Shmuel Bentov, & K.J. Schneider. (2003). Vital Effects on Stable Isotopes and Trace Elements in Foraminifera and Corals in View of Their Biomineralization Mechanisms. AGUFM. 2003.2 indexed citations
17.
Silverman, Jacob, Boáz Lazar, & Jonathan Erez. (2003). Sorting out the effects of temperature, carbonate chemistry and nutrients on the metabolic performance of a coral reef. EAEJA. 11901.1 indexed citations
18.
Erez, Jonathan, et al.. (2002). Sulfur in Foraminifera Shells, a New Paleoceanographic Proxy for Carbonate Ion in Seawater. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2002.1 indexed citations
19.
Krumgalz, Boris S., et al.. (1990). Anthropogenic CO2 penetration in the northern Red Sea and in the Gulf of Elat (Aqaba). Institutional Archive of Ifremer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea).5 indexed citations
20.
Lee, John J., et al.. (1986). Experiments on persistence of endosymbiotic diatoms in the larger foraminifer: Amphistegina lessonii. Symbiosis. 1(3). 211–226.3 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.