World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Biology and Biochemistry

D-Index
94
Citations
29161
World Ranking
2032
National Ranking
129

Alison M. Smith publication distribution in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Biology and Biochemistry in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Alison M. Smith sits on this spectrum.

47–56 publications: 8 scientists 57–66 publications: 35 scientists 67–76 publications: 106 scientists 77–86 publications: 231 scientists 87–96 publications: 414 scientists 97–106 publications: 546 scientists 107–116 publications: 704 scientists 117–126 publications: 849 scientists 127–136 publications: 980 scientists 137–146 publications: 942 scientists 147–156 publications: 969 scientists 157–166 publications: 950 scientists 167–176 publications: 951 scientists 177–186 publications: 915 scientists 187–196 publications: 787 scientists 197–206 publications: 841 scientists 207–216 publications: 735 scientists 217–226 publications: 709 scientists 227–236 publications: 651 scientists 237–246 publications: 605 scientists 247–256 publications: 510 scientists 257–266 publications: 524 scientists 267–276 publications: 434 scientists 277–286 publications: 418 scientists 287–296 publications: 350 scientists 297–306 publications: 363 scientists 307–316 publications: 315 scientists 317–326 publications: 296 scientists 327–336 publications: 261 scientists 337–346 publications: 240 scientists 347–356 publications: 219 scientists 357–366 publications: 197 scientists 367–376 publications: 154 scientists 377–386 publications: 161 scientists 387–396 publications: 155 scientists 397–406 publications: 145 scientists 407–416 publications: 124 scientists 417–426 publications: 112 scientists 427–436 publications: 132 scientists 437–446 publications: 116 scientists 447–456 publications: 99 scientists 457–466 publications: 81 scientists 467–476 publications: 91 scientists 477–486 publications: 80 scientists 487–496 publications: 80 scientists 497–506 publications: 60 scientists 507–516 publications: 36 scientists 517–526 publications: 46 scientists 527–536 publications: 54 scientists 537–546 publications: 44 scientists 547–556 publications: 43 scientists 557–566 publications: 43 scientists 567–576 publications: 42 scientists 577–586 publications: 25 scientists 587–596 publications: 34 scientists 597–606 publications: 23 scientists 607–616 publications: 33 scientists 617–626 publications: 31 scientists 627–636 publications: 27 scientists 637–646 publications: 25 scientists 647–656 publications: 28 scientists 657–666 publications: 34 scientists 667–676 publications: 18 scientists 677–686 publications: 16 scientists 687–696 publications: 10 scientists 697–706 publications: 12 scientists 707–716 publications: 21 scientists 717–726 publications: 12 scientists 727–736 publications: 12 scientists 737–746 publications: 10 scientists 747–756 publications: 7 scientists 757–766 publications: 13 scientists 767–776 publications: 15 scientists 777–786 publications: 13 scientists 787–796 publications: 9 scientists 797–806 publications: 9 scientists 807–816 publications: 7 scientists 817–826 publications: 4 scientists 827–836 publications: 9 scientists 837–846 publications: 7 scientists 847–856 publications: 3 scientists 857–866 publications: 5 scientists 867–876 publications: 5 scientists 877–886 publications: 11 scientists 887–896 publications: 3 scientists 897–906 publications: 4 scientists 907–916 publications: 7 scientists 917–926 publications: 5 scientists 927–936 publications: 6 scientists 937–946 publications: 6 scientists 947–956 publications: 3 scientists 957–966 publications: 7 scientists 967–976 publications: 2 scientists 977–986 publications: 2 scientists 987–996 publications: 1 scientists 997–1,006 publications: 5 scientists 1,007–1,016 publications: 2 scientists 1,017–1,026 publications: 2 scientists 1,027 publications: 1 scientists 1,028+ publications: 100 scientists
47 publications 1,028+

This scientist: 198 publications — 49th percentile

49% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,028 publications or more.

Alison M. Smith D-index placement in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Biology and Biochemistry scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Alison M. Smith sits on this spectrum.

40–41 D-Index: 80 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 183 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 317 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 504 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 718 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 900 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 1,026 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 1,150 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 1,236 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 1,253 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 1,163 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 1,131 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 1,032 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 897 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 814 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 715 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 709 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 596 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 512 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 473 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 412 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 373 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 358 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 285 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 273 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 227 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 208 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 193 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 153 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 157 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 148 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 120 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 113 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 100 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 86 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 67 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 72 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 73 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 64 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 53 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 60 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 54 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 43 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 38 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 49 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 26 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 18 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 23 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 32 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 32 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 27 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 19 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 22 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 12 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 16 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 14 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 10 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 13 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 10 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 7 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 9 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 13 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 4 scientists 166 D-Index: 4 scientists 167+ D-Index: 98 scientists
40 D-Index 167+

This scientist: 94 D-Index — 90th percentile

90% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 167 D-Index or more.

Overview

Alison M. Smith is affiliated with the John Innes Centre in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily falls within the Agricultural and Biological Sciences, with a particular focus on Plant Science. Additional subfields of study relevant to their work include Nutrition and Dietetics, Molecular Biology, Biomedical Engineering, and Infectious Diseases.

Their research addresses a variety of topics including:

  • Food composition and properties
  • Plant nutrient uptake and metabolism
  • Plant stress responses and tolerance
  • Photosynthetic processes and mechanisms
  • Plant molecular biology research
  • Phytase and its applications
  • Plant responses to water stress

Alison M. Smith has authored several papers, among which are:

  • "Starch: A Flexible, Adaptable Carbon Store Coupled to Plant Growth" (2020), published in Annual Review of Plant Biology
  • "Rising rates of starch degradation during daytime and trehalose 6-phosphate optimize carbon availability" (2022), published in PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
  • "Sucrose synthases are not involved in starch synthesis in Arabidopsis leaves" (2022), published in Nature Plants
  • "Restriction of cytosolic sucrose hydrolysis profoundly alters development, metabolism, and gene expression in Arabidopsis roots" (2020), published in Journal of Experimental Botany
  • "Loss of PROTEIN TARGETING TO STARCH 2 has variable effects on starch synthesis across organs and species" (2022), published in Journal of Experimental Botany

Frequently, their work appears in publication venues including:

  • PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
  • Journal of Experimental Botany
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Annual Review of Plant Biology
  • Nature Plants

Throughout their career, Alison M. Smith has collaborated extensively with a number of researchers. Regular coauthors include:

  • Mark Stitt
  • Samuel C. Zeeman
  • Regina Feil
  • John E. Lunn
  • Hirofumi Ishihara

Best Publications

  • Coordination of carbon supply and plant growth

    Alison M. Smith;Mark Stitt

  • Functional Genomic Analysis of the AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR Gene Family Members in Arabidopsis thaliana : Unique and Overlapping Functions of ARF7 and ARF19

    Yoko Okushima;Paul J. Overvoorde;Kazunari Arima;Jose M. Alonso

  • Starch: its metabolism, evolution, and biotechnological modification in plants.

    Samuel C. Zeeman;Jens Kossmann;Alison M. Smith

  • THE SYNTHESIS OF THE STARCH GRANULE

    A. M. Smith;K. Denyer;C. Martin

  • Circadian control of carbohydrate availability for growth in Arabidopsis plants at night

    Alexander Graf;Armin Schlereth;Mark Stitt;Alison M. Smith

  • The wrinkled-seed character of pea described by Mendel is caused by a transposon-like insertion in a gene encoding starch-branching enzyme

    Madan K. Bhattacharyya;Alison M. Smith;T.H.Noel Ellis;Cliff Hedley

  • Diurnal Changes in the Transcriptome Encoding Enzymes of Starch Metabolism Provide Evidence for Both Transcriptional and Posttranscriptional Regulation of Starch Metabolism in Arabidopsis Leaves

    Steven M. Smith;Daniel C. Fulton;Tansy Chia;David Thorneycroft

  • A Previously Unknown Maltose Transporter Essential for Starch Degradation in Leaves

    Totte Niittylä;Gaëlle Messerli;Martine Trevisan;Jychian Chen

  • Normal growth of Arabidopsis requires cytosolic invertase but not sucrose synthase

    D. H. Paul Barratt;Paul Derbyshire;Kim Findlay;Marilyn Pike

  • Quantification of starch in plant tissues

    Alison M Smith;Samuel C Zeeman

  • The diurnal metabolism of leaf starch.

    Samuel C. Zeeman;Steven M. Smith;Alison M. Smith

  • Functional genomic analysis of the AUXIN/INDOLE-3-ACETIC ACID gene family members in Arabidopsis thaliana

    Paul J. Overvoorde;Yoko Okushima;José M. Alonso;April Chan

  • The Arabidopsis sex1 Mutant Is Defective in the R1 Protein, a General Regulator of Starch Degradation in Plants, and Not in the Chloroplast Hexose Transporter

    Tien-Shin Yu;Heike Kofler;Rainer E. Häusler;Diana Hille

  • Analysis of the sucrose synthase gene family in Arabidopsis.

    Zuzanna Bieniawska;D. H. Paul Barratt;Andrew P. Garlick;Vera Thole

  • β-AMYLASE4, a Noncatalytic Protein Required for Starch Breakdown, Acts Upstream of Three Active β-Amylases in Arabidopsis Chloroplasts

    Daniel C. Fulton;Michaela Stettler;Tabea Mettler;Cara K. Vaughan

  • A Mutant of Arabidopsis Lacking a Chloroplastic Isoamylase Accumulates Both Starch and Phytoglycogen

    Samuel C. Zeeman;Takayuki Umemoto;Wei-Ling Lue;Pui Au-Yeung

  • The biosynthesis of starch granules.

    Alison M. Smith

  • The major form of ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase in maize endosperm is extra-plastidial.

    Kay Denyer;Francie Dunlap;Tine Thorbjørnsen;Peter Keeling

  • A cytosolic glucosyltransferase is required for conversion of starch to sucrose in Arabidopsis leaves at night

    Tansy Chia;David Thorneycroft;Andrew Chapple;Gaëlle Messerli

  • A critical role for disproportionating enzyme in starch breakdown is revealed by a knock‐out mutation in Arabidopsis

    Joanna H. Critchley;Samuel C. Zeeman;Takeshi Takaha;Alison M. Smith

Frequent Co-Authors

Cathie Martin
Cathie Martin Norwich Research Park
Steven M. Smith
Steven M. Smith University of Tasmania
Trevor L. Wang
Trevor L. Wang John Innes Centre
Robert A. Field
Robert A. Field University of Manchester
John E. Lunn
John E. Lunn Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology
Mark Stitt
Mark Stitt Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology
Regina Feil
Regina Feil Max Planck Society
Birte Svensson
Birte Svensson Technical University of Denmark
Richard C. Leegood
Richard C. Leegood University of Sheffield

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

Advancing your studies beyond Biology and Biochemistry opens a world of career opportunities in healthcare, research, and wellness. Today, many top programs offer online pathways to help you gain the qualifications you need, often while balancing work or family commitments.

For those interested in pharmaceutical sciences, earning a degree from the best online pharmacy school can prepare you for clinical practice or research roles. If your interests lean toward physical fitness, anatomy, or sports medicine, pursuing an online exercise science degree or choosing from online kinesiology programs can help you launch a career in wellness, coaching, or rehabilitation.

Alternatively, if you are a nursing professional aiming to specialize, the best online post master’s pmhnp programs offer accelerated certification in psychiatric-mental health. No matter your path, online degrees provide flexible, accredited options to expand your expertise and boost your professional prospects in science and health-related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Alison M. Smith

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles