Australian Systematic Botany

1.1k papers and 16.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.1k papers published in Australian Systematic Botany in the last decades have received a total of 16.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Australian Systematic Botany usually cover Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (779 papers), Plant Science (487 papers) and Molecular Biology (390 papers) specifically the topics of Plant Diversity and Evolution (549 papers), Plant and Fungal Species Descriptions (274 papers) and Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies (210 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Australian Systematic Botany are M. I. H. Brooker, Pauline Y. Ladiges, RS Hill, Mike Pole, Joël Cracraft, Michael D. Crisp, Robert S. Hill, Raymond J. Carpenter, Gregory J. Jordan and W. J. Woelkerling.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Australian Systematic Botany

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Australian Systematic Botany. 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 Australian Systematic Botany.

Countries where authors publish in Australian Systematic Botany

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Australian Systematic Botany. 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 Australian Systematic Botany with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Australian Systematic Botany more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025