Comparative and Functional Genomics

438 papers and 8.2k indexed citations i.

About

The 438 papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics in the last decades have received a total of 8.2k indexed citations. Papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics usually cover Molecular Biology (359 papers), Genetics (78 papers) and Plant Science (72 papers) specifically the topics of Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies (99 papers), Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks (71 papers) and Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies (62 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Comparative and Functional Genomics are Oliver Fiehn, Alexa T. McCray, Edward R. Dougherty, Francesco L. Brancia, Laurence Wurth, Yusuf Tutar, Chris Mungall, Javier Paz‐Ares, Jo Wixon and John F. Allen.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Comparative and Functional Genomics. 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 Comparative and Functional Genomics.

Countries where authors publish in Comparative and Functional Genomics

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Comparative and Functional Genomics. 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 Comparative and Functional Genomics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Comparative and Functional Genomics 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