Countries where authors publish in Acta Botanica Hungarica
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Acta Botanica Hungarica. 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 papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Acta Botanica Hungarica more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica
This network shows the impact of papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica.
About Acta Botanica Hungarica
The 602 papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica in the last decades have received a total of 3.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Acta Botanica Hungarica usually cover Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (356 papers), Plant Science (459 papers) and Food Science (92 papers) specifically the topics of Botany and Plant Ecology Studies (206 papers), Lichen and fungal ecology (152 papers), Bryophyte Studies and Records (105 papers), Plant Diversity and Evolution (93 papers), Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions (90 papers), Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases (58 papers), Botanical Research and Applications (56 papers) and Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies (48 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Acta Botanica Hungarica are A. Borhidi, Tamás Pócs, S. Y. Kondratyuk, Zoltán Botta‐Dukát, Edit Farkas, László Lőkös, Zsolt Molnár, Jae‐Seoun Hur, Ferenc Horváth and János Bölöni.
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.