Countries where authors publish in Indian Phytopathology
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Indian Phytopathology. 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 Indian Phytopathology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Indian Phytopathology more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Indian Phytopathology
This network shows the impact of papers published in Indian Phytopathology. 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 Indian Phytopathology.
About Indian Phytopathology
The 3.3k papers published in Indian Phytopathology in the last decades have received a total of 13.7k indexed citations . Papers published in Indian Phytopathology usually cover Plant Science (2.9k papers), Horticulture (60 papers) and Cell Biology (1.0k papers) specifically the topics of Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases (1.0k papers), Plant Disease Resistance and Genetics (564 papers), Plant Pathogens and Resistance (358 papers), Plant Virus Research Studies (357 papers), Agriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management (328 papers), Plant Disease Management Techniques (319 papers), Plant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies (316 papers) and Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity (314 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Indian Phytopathology are Mamta Thakur, Rashmi Aggarwal, S. C. Dubey, G. P. Rao, S. J. Kolte, Shyam Sunder, Ram Singh, R. Viswanathan, Mujeebur Rahman Khan and Y. S. Ahlawat.
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.