World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
42
Citations
6410
World Ranking
7434
National Ranking
2649

Adrian A. Harpold publication distribution in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Environmental Sciences in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Adrian A. Harpold sits on this spectrum.

41–50 publications: 21 scientists 51–60 publications: 62 scientists 61–70 publications: 133 scientists 71–80 publications: 257 scientists 81–90 publications: 361 scientists 91–100 publications: 440 scientists 101–110 publications: 492 scientists 111–120 publications: 541 scientists 121–130 publications: 617 scientists 131–140 publications: 544 scientists 141–150 publications: 541 scientists 151–160 publications: 539 scientists 161–170 publications: 444 scientists 171–180 publications: 444 scientists 181–190 publications: 400 scientists 191–200 publications: 377 scientists 201–210 publications: 318 scientists 211–220 publications: 282 scientists 221–230 publications: 263 scientists 231–240 publications: 220 scientists 241–250 publications: 217 scientists 251–260 publications: 180 scientists 261–270 publications: 181 scientists 271–280 publications: 155 scientists 281–290 publications: 130 scientists 291–300 publications: 127 scientists 301–310 publications: 130 scientists 311–320 publications: 85 scientists 321–330 publications: 106 scientists 331–340 publications: 80 scientists 341–350 publications: 83 scientists 351–360 publications: 75 scientists 361–370 publications: 69 scientists 371–380 publications: 52 scientists 381–390 publications: 54 scientists 391–400 publications: 56 scientists 401–410 publications: 44 scientists 411–420 publications: 40 scientists 421–430 publications: 36 scientists 431–440 publications: 25 scientists 441–450 publications: 25 scientists 451–460 publications: 32 scientists 461–470 publications: 29 scientists 471–480 publications: 21 scientists 481–490 publications: 26 scientists 491–500 publications: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 scientists 521–530 publications: 15 scientists 531–540 publications: 22 scientists 541–550 publications: 12 scientists 551–560 publications: 15 scientists 561–570 publications: 11 scientists 571–580 publications: 19 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 9 scientists 601–610 publications: 7 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 5 scientists 631–640 publications: 5 scientists 641–650 publications: 6 scientists 651–660 publications: 3 scientists 661–670 publications: 3 scientists 671–680 publications: 4 scientists 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 690+

This scientist: 139 publications — 35th percentile

35% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

Adrian A. Harpold D-index placement in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Environmental Sciences scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Adrian A. Harpold sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 12 scientists 31 D-Index: 26 scientists 32 D-Index: 51 scientists 33 D-Index: 88 scientists 34 D-Index: 123 scientists 35 D-Index: 163 scientists 36 D-Index: 206 scientists 37 D-Index: 267 scientists 38 D-Index: 265 scientists 39 D-Index: 275 scientists 40 D-Index: 321 scientists 41 D-Index: 343 scientists 42 D-Index: 305 scientists 43 D-Index: 336 scientists 44 D-Index: 330 scientists 45 D-Index: 348 scientists 46 D-Index: 291 scientists 47 D-Index: 275 scientists 48 D-Index: 272 scientists 49 D-Index: 273 scientists 50 D-Index: 263 scientists 51 D-Index: 232 scientists 52 D-Index: 266 scientists 53 D-Index: 217 scientists 54 D-Index: 198 scientists 55 D-Index: 177 scientists 56 D-Index: 202 scientists 57 D-Index: 204 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 177 scientists 60 D-Index: 166 scientists 61 D-Index: 152 scientists 62 D-Index: 143 scientists 63 D-Index: 150 scientists 64 D-Index: 124 scientists 65 D-Index: 119 scientists 66 D-Index: 120 scientists 67 D-Index: 118 scientists 68 D-Index: 82 scientists 69 D-Index: 98 scientists 70 D-Index: 94 scientists 71 D-Index: 105 scientists 72 D-Index: 74 scientists 73 D-Index: 84 scientists 74 D-Index: 70 scientists 75 D-Index: 67 scientists 76 D-Index: 78 scientists 77 D-Index: 60 scientists 78 D-Index: 59 scientists 79 D-Index: 52 scientists 80 D-Index: 47 scientists 81 D-Index: 38 scientists 82 D-Index: 48 scientists 83 D-Index: 42 scientists 84 D-Index: 42 scientists 85 D-Index: 43 scientists 86 D-Index: 29 scientists 87 D-Index: 37 scientists 88 D-Index: 29 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 34 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 22 scientists 93 D-Index: 17 scientists 94 D-Index: 19 scientists 95 D-Index: 24 scientists 96 D-Index: 21 scientists 97 D-Index: 20 scientists 98 D-Index: 24 scientists 99 D-Index: 17 scientists 100 D-Index: 17 scientists 101 D-Index: 21 scientists 102 D-Index: 25 scientists 103 D-Index: 18 scientists 104 D-Index: 26 scientists 105 D-Index: 20 scientists 106 D-Index: 15 scientists 107 D-Index: 10 scientists 108 D-Index: 13 scientists 109 D-Index: 15 scientists 110 D-Index: 12 scientists 111 D-Index: 8 scientists 112 D-Index: 7 scientists 113 D-Index: 9 scientists 114 D-Index: 6 scientists 115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116 D-Index: 7 scientists 117 D-Index: 8 scientists 118 D-Index: 3 scientists 119 D-Index: 5 scientists 120 D-Index: 7 scientists 121 D-Index: 2 scientists 122 D-Index: 4 scientists 123 D-Index: 8 scientists 124 D-Index: 7 scientists 125 D-Index: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

This scientist: 42 D-Index — 25th percentile

25% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more.

Overview

Adrian A. Harpold is affiliated with the University of Nevada Reno in the United States. Their research focuses primarily on Environmental Science and Earth and Planetary Sciences, with a significant concentration in Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change, and Water Science and Technology. Additional subfields include Environmental Chemistry and Nature and Landscape Conservation.

The scientist's work covers a variety of topics including:

  • Cryospheric studies and observations
  • Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
  • Climate change and permafrost
  • Fish Ecology and Management Studies

Harpold has published extensively, with notable papers such as:

  • From Hydrometeorology to River Water Quality: Can a Deep Learning Model Predict Dissolved Oxygen at the Continental Scale? (2021), Environmental Science & Technology
  • Temperature controls production but hydrology regulates export of dissolved organic carbon at the catchment scale (2020), Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
  • Streams as Mirrors: Reading Subsurface Water Chemistry From Stream Chemistry (2021), Water Resources Research
  • Why does snowmelt-driven streamflow response to warming vary? A data-driven review and predictive framework (2022), Environmental Research Letters
  • Climate Controls on River Chemistry (2022), Earth's Future

Their frequent co-authors include Gary Sterle, Sebastian A. Krogh, Li Li, Julia Perdrial, and Kristen L. Underwood. Collaborations with these researchers have contributed to a consistent output of publications.

Harpold's research has been published frequently in venues such as Water Resources Research, SSRN Electronic Journal, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, Earth's Future, and Ecohydrology. Water Resources Research stands out as the most common venue for their work.

Best Publications

  • Twenty-three unsolved problems in hydrology (UPH)–a community perspective

    Günter Blöschl;Marc F.P. Bierkens;Antonio Chambel;Christophe Cudennec

  • Snowmelt rate dictates streamflow

    Theodore B. Barnhart;Theodore B. Barnhart;Noah P. Molotch;Noah P. Molotch;Noah P. Molotch;Ben Livneh;Ben Livneh;Adrian A. Harpold

  • From Hydrometeorology to River Water Quality: Can a Deep Learning Model Predict Dissolved Oxygen at the Continental Scale?

    Wei Zhi;Dapeng Feng;Wen Ping Tsai;Gary Sterle

  • Changes in snowpack accumulation and ablation in the intermountain west

    Adrian Harpold;Adrian Harpold;Paul Brooks;Seshadri Rajagopal;Seshadri Rajagopal;Ingo Heidbuchel

  • Rain or Snow: Hydrologic Processes, Observations, Prediction, and Research Needs

    Adrian A. Harpold;Michael L. Kaplan;P. Zion Klos;Timothy Link

  • Humidity determines snowpack ablation under a warming climate

    Adrian A. Harpold;Paul D. Brooks

  • Quantifying the effects of vegetation structure on snow accumulation and ablation in mixed-conifer forests

    P. D. Broxton;A. A. Harpold;J. A. Biederman;P. A. Troch

  • Changes in snow accumulation and ablation following the Las Conchas Forest Fire, New Mexico, USA

    Adrian A. Harpold;Adrian A. Harpold;Joel A. Biederman;Katherine Condon;Manuel Merino

  • Defining snow drought and why it matters

    Adrian Harpold;Michael D. Dettinger;Seshadri Rajagopal

  • Recent tree die-off has little effect on streamflow in contrast to expected increases from historical studies

    Joel A. Biederman;Andrew J. Somor;Adrian A. Harpold;Ethan D. Gutmann

  • Soil moisture response to snowmelt timing in mixed‐conifer subalpine forests

    Adrian A. Harpold;Noah P. Molotch;Noah P. Molotch;Keith N. Musselman;Roger C. Bales

  • How Water, Carbon, and Energy Drive Critical Zone Evolution: The Jemez–Santa Catalina Critical Zone Observatory

    Jon Chorover;Peter A. Troch;Craig Rasmussen;Paul D. Brooks

  • Variation in root density along stream banks.

    Theresa M. Wynn;Saied Mostaghimi;James A. Burger;Adrian A. Harpold

  • Multiscale observations of snow accumulation and peak snowpack following widespread, insect-induced lodgepole pine mortality

    Joel A Biederman;Paul D Brooks;Adrian A Harpold;Adrian A Harpold;David J Gochis

  • Increased evaporation following widespread tree mortality limits streamflow response

    J. A. Biederman;A. A. Harpold;D. J. Gochis;B. E. Ewers

  • Sensitivity of soil water availability to changing snowmelt timing in the western U.S.

    Adrian A. Harpold;Noah P. Molotch;Noah P. Molotch

  • LiDAR‐derived snowpack data sets from mixed conifer forests across the Western United States

    A. A. Harpold;Q. Guo;N. Molotch;N. Molotch;P. D. Brooks

  • Streams as mirrors: reading subsurface water chemistry from stream chemistry

    Bryn Stewart;James B. Shanley;James W. Kirchner;James W. Kirchner;David Norris

  • Temperature controls production but hydrology regulates export of dissolved organic carbon at the catchment scale

    Hang Wen;Julia Perdrial;Benjamin W. Abbott;Susana Bernal

  • Rare earth elements as reactive tracers of biogeochemical weathering in forested rhyolitic terrain

    Angélica Vázquez-Ortega;Julia Perdrial;Adrian Harpold;Adrian Harpold;Xavier Zapata-Ríos

  • Topographically driven differences in energy and water constrain climatic control on forest carbon sequestration

    Tyson L. Swetnam;Paul D. Brooks;Holly R. Barnard;Adrian A. Harpold

Frequent Co-Authors

Paul D. Brooks
Paul D. Brooks University of Utah
Joel A. Biederman
Joel A. Biederman United States Department of Agriculture
Noah P. Molotch
Noah P. Molotch University of Colorado Boulder
Jon Chorover
Jon Chorover University of Arizona
Peter Troch
Peter Troch University of Arizona
Thomas Meixner
Thomas Meixner University of Arizona
Brent E. Ewers
Brent E. Ewers University of Wyoming
David Gochis
David Gochis National Center for Atmospheric Research
Jennifer C. McIntosh
Jennifer C. McIntosh University of Arizona

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

For students interested in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open up diverse career opportunities. Many programs offer flexibility and affordability, such as the best affordable online general studies degree programs, which provide a broad educational foundation with lower cost and flexible learning options. This can be a great starting point for those seeking to enter environmental fields without the pressure of specialized coursework right away.

Some prospective students look for the what is the easiest bachelor's degree to get to balance work, life, and study more easily. While not specific to Environmental Sciences, choosing an easier program may help maintain steady progress and build confidence before specializing.

For a focused approach, online programs in geosciences are highly relevant. The geology degree online offers insight into earth processes, which is critical for environmental monitoring and conservation careers. These degrees are designed to combine theoretical knowledge with practical skills in earth science.

Additionally, technology-driven fields like Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are essential to environmental data analysis. Prospective students can consider the best gis graduate programs, which prepare graduates for careers in spatial data management—an increasingly important tool for environmental planning and resource management.

Best Scientists Citing Adrian A. Harpold

Trending Scientists