International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code)
Impact in
- Plant Science 486
Classified as
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w72393075 →Countries where authors are citing International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code)
This map shows the geographic impact of International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code). 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 International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code) with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code) more than expected).
Fields of papers citing International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code)
This network shows the impact of International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code). Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code).
About International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Melbourne Code)
This paper, published in 2012, received 904 indexed citations . Written by John McNeill, Fred R. Barrie, Will Buck, V. Demoulin, Werner Greuter, David L. Hawksworth, Patrick S. Herendeen, Samuel Knapp, Karol Marhold and Jefferson Prado covering the research area of Plant Science. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Plant Science (486 citations), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (470 citations), Molecular Biology (378 citations), Cell Biology (216 citations) and Ecology (70 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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w72393075.