World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
47
Citations
8111
World Ranking
5804
National Ranking
2112

Ann M. Fridlind 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 Ann M. Fridlind 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: 283 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: 25 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 18 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 681–686 publications: 3 scientists 687+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 687+

This scientist: 252 publications — 78th percentile

78% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 687 publications or more.

Ann M. Fridlind 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 Ann M. Fridlind 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: 199 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: 19 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: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 125+

This scientist: 47 D-Index — 42nd percentile

42% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 125 D-Index or more.

Overview

Ann M. Fridlind is affiliated with the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in the United States. Their research career focuses broadly on Earth and Planetary Sciences, with substantial contributions in Environmental Science. Within these fields, their subfields of expertise include Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change, Earth-Surface Processes, Environmental Engineering, and Aerospace Engineering.

Their main research topics cover a range of atmospheric and environmental phenomena, including:

  • Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
  • Climate variability and models
  • Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
  • Atmospheric Ozone and Climate
  • Aeolian processes and effects

Ann M. Fridlind has published extensively in several scientific venues. The most frequent publication venues are:

  • Atmospheric chemistry and physics
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
  • Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Notable recent papers include:

  • Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics, 2020, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
  • An overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) project: aerosol-cloud-radiation interactions in the southeast Atlantic basin, 2021, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • A new look at the environmental conditions favorable to secondary ice production, 2020, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • Constraining the Twomey effect from satellite observations: issues and perspectives, 2020, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • Impacts of Varying Concentrations of Cloud Condensation Nuclei on Deep Convective Cloud Updrafts-A Multimodel Assessment, 2021, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

Throughout their career, Fridlind has collaborated frequently with other researchers. Regular coauthors include:

  • Andrew S. Ackerman
  • Israel Silber
  • G Cesana
  • Brian Cairns
  • Florian Tornow

Best Publications

  • Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics

    Hugh Morrison;Marcus van Lier-Walqui;Ann M. Fridlind;Wojciech W. Grabowski

  • Short-lived pollutants in the Arctic: their climate impact and possible mitigation strategies

    P. K. Quinn;T. S. Bates;E. Baum;N. Doubleday

  • Remote Sensing of Droplet Number Concentration in Warm Clouds: A Review of the Current State of Knowledge and Perspectives

    Daniel P. Grosvenor;Odran Sourdeval;Paquita Zuidema;Andrew Ackerman

  • Intercomparison of model simulations of mixed-phase clouds observed during the ARM Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment. I: single-layer cloud

    Stephen A. Klein;Renata B. McCoy;Hugh Morrison;Andrew S. Ackerman

  • Ice properties of single‐layer stratocumulus during the Mixed‐Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment: 1. Observations

    Greg M. McFarquhar;Gong Zhang;Michael R. Poellot;Gregory L. Kok

  • Ice properties of single-layer stratocumulus during the Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment: 2. Model results

    Ann M. Fridlind;A. S. Ackerman;Greg Michael McFarquhar;G. Zhang

  • An overview of the ORACLES (ObseRvations of Aerosols above CLouds and their intEractionS) project: aerosol–cloud–radiation interactions in the southeast Atlantic basin

    Jens Redemann;Robert Wood;Paquita Zuidema;Sarah J. Doherty

  • Evaluation of cloud-resolving and limited area model intercomparison simulations using TWP-ICE observations: 1. Deep convective updraft properties

    Adam Varble;Edward J. Zipser;Ann M. Fridlind;Ping Zhu

  • High‐resolution NU‐WRF simulations of a deep convective‐precipitation system during MC3E: Further improvements and comparisons between Goddard microphysics schemes and observations

    Wei-Kuo Tao;Di Wu;Stephen Lang;Jiun-Dar Chern;Jiun-Dar Chern

  • Intercomparison of Large-Eddy Simulations of Arctic Mixed-Phase Clouds: Importance of Ice Size Distribution Assumptions

    Mikhail Ovchinnikov;Andrew S. Ackerman;Alexander Avramov;Anning Cheng

  • A study of gas‐aerosol equilibrium and aerosol pH in the remote marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACE 1)

    A. M. Fridlind;M. Z. Jacobson

  • Evaluation of cloud‐resolving and limited area model intercomparison simulations using TWP‐ICE observations: 2. Precipitation microphysics

    Adam Varble;Edward J. Zipser;Ann M. Fridlind;Ping Zhu

  • Homogeneous Ice Nucleation in Subtropical and Tropical Convection and Its Influence on Cirrus Anvil Microphysics

    Andrew J. Heymsfield;Larry M. Miloshevich;Carl Schmitt;Aaron Bansemer

  • Evidence for the Predominance of Mid-Tropospheric Aerosols as Subtropical Anvil Cloud Nuclei

    Ann M. Fridlind;Andrew S. Ackerman;Eric J. Jensen;Andrew J. Heymsfield

  • Intercomparison of cloud model simulations of Arctic mixed‐phase boundary layer clouds observed during SHEBA/FIRE‐ACE

    Hugh Morrison;Paquita Zuidema;Andrew S Ackerman;Alexander Avramov;Alexander Avramov

  • A Comparison of TWP-ICE Observational Data with Cloud-Resolving Model Results

    A. M. Fridlind;Andrew Ackerman;Jean-Pierre Chaboureau;Jiwen Fan

  • Constraining the Twomey effect from satellite observations: issues and perspectives

    Johannes Quaas;Antti Arola;Brian Cairns;Matthew Christensen

  • Intercomparison of model simulations of mixed-phase clouds observed during the ARM Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment. I: single-layer cloud: MIXED-PHASE MODEL COMPARISONS. I: SINGLE-LAYER CLOUD

    Stephen A. Klein;Renata B. McCoy;Hugh Morrison;Andrew S. Ackerman

  • Ice supersaturations exceeding 100% at the cold tropical tropopause: implications for cirrus formation and dehydration

    E. J. Jensen;J. B. Smith;L. Pfister;J. V. Pittman

  • A new look at the environmental conditions favorable to secondary ice production

    Alexei Korolev;Ivan Heckman;Mengistu Wolde;Andrew S. Ackerman

  • Cloud-scale model intercomparison of chemical constituent transport in deep convection

    M. C. Barth;S.-W. Kim;S.-W. Kim;Chen Wang;K. E. Pickering;K. E. Pickering

  • Evaluation of Cloud-Resolving Model Intercomparison Simulations Using TWP-ICE Observations: Precipitation and Cloud Structure

    Adam Varble;Ann M. Fridlind;Edward J. Zipser;Andrew S. Ackerman

Frequent Co-Authors

Andrew S. Ackerman
Andrew S. Ackerman Goddard Institute for Space Studies
Brian Cairns
Brian Cairns Goddard Institute for Space Studies
Greg M. McFarquhar
Greg M. McFarquhar University of Oklahoma
Pavlos Kollias
Pavlos Kollias Stony Brook University
Alexei Korolev
Alexei Korolev Environment and Climate Change Canada
Jiwen Fan
Jiwen Fan Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Hugh Morrison
Hugh Morrison National Center for Atmospheric Research
Toshihisa Matsui
Toshihisa Matsui Goddard Space Flight Center
Michael R. Poellot
Michael R. Poellot University of North Dakota
Daniel A. Knopf
Daniel A. Knopf Stony Brook University

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

Studying Environmental Sciences opens diverse career paths, many of which benefit from complementary degrees. For example, a geographic information systems degree equips students with advanced mapping and spatial analysis skills vital for managing natural resources and environmental data.

Those interested in policy and governance can explore public administration through online MPA degrees, which prepare graduates to influence environmental regulations and lead sustainability initiatives within government or nonprofit organizations.

Understanding social dynamics is another crucial aspect, making an online bachelors in sociology a valuable asset. This degree helps learners analyze human behavior patterns and societal impacts on the environment.

For seasoned professionals aiming for leadership or academic roles, pursuing a doctorate degree online no dissertation offers a flexible pathway to advanced expertise without the traditional dissertation hurdle, making it easier to balance work and study.

Best Scientists Citing Ann M. Fridlind

Trending Scientists