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 current and future global distribution and population at risk of dengue
2019753 citationsJane P. Messina, Oliver J. Brady et al.Nature Microbiologyprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Peter Jones'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 Peter Jones with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter Jones more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter Jones. 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 Peter Jones. The network helps show where Peter Jones may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Peter Jones
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Peter Jones.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Peter Jones 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 Peter Jones. Peter Jones is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Jones, Peter, et al.. (2020). Navigating the Old English Poor Law: the Kirkby Lonsdale Letters, 1809-1836. Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository).
Messina, Jane P., Oliver J. Brady, Nick Golding, et al.. (2019). The current and future global distribution and population at risk of dengue. Nature Microbiology. 4(9). 1508–1515.753 indexed citations breakdown →
Anderson, Leif G., Toste Tanhua, Göran Björk, et al.. (2010). Arctic Ocean Shelf - basin interaction, an active continental shelf CO2 pump and its impact on degree of calcium carbonate solubility. Deep Sea Research. 57(7). 869–879.2 indexed citations
Jones, Peter & Philip K. Thornton. (2001). Application of a simple agricultural land-use model to the studying of market dynamics and technological change in a landscape in the Colombian Andes. CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research).2 indexed citations
14.
Arocha, Y., et al.. (2000). Detection of phytoplasmas associated to yellow leaf syndrome in Cuba.. Revista de Protección Vegetal. 15(2). 81–86.5 indexed citations
Jones, Peter, et al.. (1992). Area classification and mapping for the Cerrados region of Brazil. CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research).1 indexed citations
18.
Jones, Peter, et al.. (1990). A geographical information approach for stratifying tropical Latin America to identify research problems and opportunities in sustainable agriculture. CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research).2 indexed citations
19.
Jones, Peter, et al.. (1979). An explanatory manual for CIAT's computerized land resource study of Tropical America. CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research).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.