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.
Phytophthora: Its Biology, Taxonomy, Ecology, and Pathology
Countries citing papers authored by R. Michael Erwin
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of R. Michael Erwin'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 R. Michael Erwin with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites R. Michael Erwin more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by R. Michael Erwin
This network shows the impact of papers produced by R. Michael Erwin. 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 R. Michael Erwin. The network helps show where R. Michael Erwin may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of R. Michael Erwin
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of R. Michael Erwin.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of R. Michael Erwin 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 R. Michael Erwin. R. Michael Erwin is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Erwin, R. Michael, et al.. (2006). High tides and rising seas: Potential effects on estuarine waterbirds. Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida). 214–228.52 indexed citations
5.
Gabrey, Steven W., et al.. (2006). Impacts of Marsh Management on Coastal-Marsh Bird Habitats. Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida). 155–175.33 indexed citations
6.
Erwin, R. Michael, et al.. (2004). Monitoring salt-marsh responses to open marsh water management at U.S. Fish and Wildlife coastal refuges. Ecological Restoration. 22(1). 55–56.1 indexed citations
Erwin, R. Michael. (2002). Integrated management of waterbirds: Beyond the conventional. Waterbirds. 25. 5–12.28 indexed citations
9.
Erwin, R. Michael, Barry R. Truitt, & Jaime E. Jiménez. (2001). Ground-nesting waterbirds and mammalian carnivores in the Virginia barrier island region: Running out of options. Journal of Coastal Research. 17(2). 292–296.45 indexed citations
Erwin, R. Michael. (1999). [Book review] Habitats for birds in Europe: a conservation strategy for the wider environment. Compiled by Graham M. Tucker and Michael I. Evans. Birdlife International, Cambridge, U.K., 1997. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology. 111(3). 454–456.128 indexed citations
Erwin, R. Michael. (1988). Correlates of nest-defense behavior of common terns. Journal of Field Ornithology. 59(2). 135–142.8 indexed citations
15.
Erwin, R. Michael, et al.. (1986). Winter distribution and oiling of common terns in Trinidad: A further look. Journal of Field Ornithology. 57(4). 300–308.8 indexed citations
16.
Erwin, R. Michael, Heinz Häfner, & P. Dugan. (1985). Differences in the feeding behavior of little egrets (Egretta garzetta) in two habitats in the Camargue, France. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology. 97(4). 534–538.27 indexed citations
17.
Erwin, R. Michael. (1982). Observer variability in estimating numbers: An experiment. Journal of Field Ornithology. 53(2). 159–167.44 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.