Theoretical Ecology

542 papers and 8.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 542 papers published in Theoretical Ecology in the last decades have received a total of 8.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Theoretical Ecology usually cover Nature and Landscape Conservation (206 papers), Genetics (198 papers) and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (195 papers) specifically the topics of Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (179 papers), Evolution and Genetic Dynamics (178 papers) and Plant and animal studies (170 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Theoretical Ecology are Hal Caswell, Christopher A. Klausmeier, Sergei Petrovskii, Mercedes Pascual, Richard J. Williams, C. Jayaprakash, Vishwesha Guttal, Alan Hastings, Marten Scheffer and Egbert H. van Nes.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Theoretical Ecology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Theoretical Ecology. 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 Theoretical Ecology.

Countries where authors publish in Theoretical Ecology

Since Specialization
Citations

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