World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Arthur H. Chappelka

Arthur H. Chappelka

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
37
Citations
5385
World Ranking
8897
National Ranking
3190

Arthur H. Chappelka 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 Arthur H. Chappelka 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: 111 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Arthur H. Chappelka 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 Arthur H. Chappelka 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: 37 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Arthur H. Chappelka is affiliated with Auburn University in the United States and works primarily within the field of Environmental Science. Their research spans across several subfields including Environmental Engineering, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Insect Science, Ecology, and Geology.

The scientist's work focuses on topics related to Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications, Forest Ecology and Management, Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies, Remote Sensing in Agriculture, and 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage. These areas indicate a concentration on technological applications for environmental monitoring and analysis, with particular attention to forest and agricultural ecosystems.

Chappelka has published research in several academic venues. Notable publication venues include the International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research and Geocarto International.

  • Estimating Urban Tree Metrics Using Terrestrial LiDAR Scanning (2022), International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research
  • A GeOBIA-assisted framework for canopy height estimation using airborne lidar scanning: a city-scale approach (2025), Geocarto International

Frequent collaborators in Chappelka's research include Tyler Jones, Luke Marzen, Michael S. Agbozo, and Chandana Mitra. Collaborative work has been particularly noted with Tyler Jones and Luke Marzen, each contributing to multiple publications.

  • Tyler Jones
  • Luke Marzen
  • Michael S. Agbozo
  • Chandana Mitra

Best Publications

  • Model estimates of net primary productivity, evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency in the terrestrial ecosystems of the southern United States during 1895–2007

    Hanqin Tian;Guangsheng Chen;Mingliang Liu;Chi Zhang

  • The Ozone Component of Global Change: Potential Effects on Agricultural and Horticultural Plant Yield, Product Quality and Interactions with Invasive Species

    Fitzgerald Booker;Russell Muntifering;Margaret McGrath;Kent Burkey

  • Ambient ozone effects on forest trees of the eastern United States: a review.

    Arthur H. Chappelka;Lisa J. Samuelson

  • Ambient ozone and plant health

    Sagar Krupa;Margaret Tuttle McGrath;Christian P. Andersen;Fitzgerald L. Booker

  • Perspectives regarding 50 years of research on effects of tropospheric ozone air pollution on US forests

    David F. Karnosky;John M. Skelly;Kevin E. Percy;Art H. Chappelka

  • Impacts of urbanization on carbon balance in terrestrial ecosystems of the Southern United States

    Chi Zhang;Hanqin Tian;Guangsheng Chen;Arthur Chappelka

  • Century-Scale Responses of Ecosystem Carbon Storage and Flux to Multiple Environmental Changes in the Southern United States

    Hanqin Tian;Guangsheng Chen;Chi Zhang;Mingliang Liu

  • Developing a land-cover classification to select indicators of forest ecosystem health in a rapidly urbanizing landscape

    Diane M. Styers;Arthur H. Chappelka;Luke J. Marzen;Greg L. Somers

  • Impacts of tropospheric ozone and climate change on net primary productivity and net carbon exchange of China's forest ecosystems

    Wei Ren;Hanqin Tian;Bo Tao;Arthur Chappelka

  • Drought in the Southern United States over the 20th century: variability and its impacts on terrestrial ecosystem productivity and carbon storage

    Guangsheng Chen;Hanqin Tian;Chi Zhang;Chi Zhang;Mingliang Liu

  • Predisposition of trees by air pollutants to low temperatures and moisture stress.

    Arthur H. Chappelka;Peter H. Freer-Smith

  • Diversity of an early successional plant community as influenced by ozone

    D. N. Barbo;A. H. Chappelka;G. L. Somers;M. S. Miller-Goodman

  • Air Pollution, Global Change and Forests in the New Millennium

    D.F. Karnosky;J. Pikkarainen;K.E. Percy;C. Simpson

  • Visible foliar injury caused by ozone alters the relationship between SPAD meter readings and chlorophyll concentrations in cutleaf coneflower

    Howard S. Neufeld;Arthur H. Chappelka;Greg L. Somers;Kent O. Burkey

  • Seasonal profiles of leaf ascorbic acid content and redox state in ozone-sensitive wildflowers

    Kent O. Burkey;Howard S. Neufeld;Lara Souza;Arthur H. Chappelka

  • Tree shelters and weed control: Effects on protection, survival and growth of cherrybark oak seedlings planted on a cutover site

    Mark R. Dubois;Arthur H. Chappelka;Efrem Robbins;Greg Somers

  • Evaluation of ozone injury on foliage of black cherry (Prunus serotina) and tall milkweed (Asclepias exaltata) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

    Arthur Chappelka;James Renfro;Greg Somers;Bruce Nash

  • Ozone injury on cutleaf coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata) and crown-beard (Verbesina occidentalis) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

    A.H. Chappelka;H.S. Neufeld;A.W. Davison;G.L. Somers

  • Response of Leaf Spectral Reflectance in Loblolly Pine to Increased Atmospheric Ozone and Precipitation Acidity

    Unknown

  • Response of total tannins and phenolics in loblolly pine foliage exposed to ozone and acid rain.

    D. N. Jordan;T. H. Green;A. H. Chappelka;B. G. Lockaby

  • Stomatal behavior of ozone-sensitive and -insensitive coneflowers (Rudbeckia laciniata var. digitata) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park

    Nancy Grulke;H. S. Neufeld;A. W. Davison;M. Roberts

  • Influence of ozone pollution and climate variability on net primary productivity and carbon storage in China's grassland ecosystems from 1961 to 2000.

    Wei Ren;Hanqin Tian;Guangsheng Chen;Mingliang Liu

  • How Do Urban Forests Compare? Tree Diversity in Urban and Periurban Forests of the Southeastern US

    Amy Blood;Gregory Starr;Francisco Escobedo;Art Chappelka

Frequent Co-Authors

Wei Ren
Wei Ren Shaanxi Normal University
Hanqin Tian
Hanqin Tian Auburn University
Chi Zhang
Chi Zhang Linyi University
Guangsheng Chen
Guangsheng Chen Zhejiang A & F University
Shufen Pan
Shufen Pan Auburn University
Mingliang Liu
Mingliang Liu Washington State University
Ge Sun
Ge Sun US Forest Service
Chaoqun Lu
Chaoqun Lu Iowa State University
Kent O. Burkey
Kent O. Burkey Agricultural Research Service
Xiaofeng Xu
Xiaofeng Xu San Diego State 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

For those interested in advancing their education in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open diverse career opportunities. Many professionals seek flexible options like online doctoral programs without dissertation, which allow for a focus on practical leadership and policy development without the traditional dissertation process.

For educators and researchers aiming to deepen their expertise, there are eds to edd bridge programs online that facilitate a smooth transition from a master’s level education to a doctoral level, emphasizing applied research relevant to environmental education and management.

Social work intersects increasingly with environmental issues, making programs like the cheapest dsw program valuable for those looking to specialize in social justice and community health related to environmental challenges.

Additionally, students seeking broad interdisciplinary knowledge can benefit from an online general studies degree affordable option. This degree supports customized learning paths that combine environmental sciences with other relevant fields, equipping graduates for varied career pathways.

Best Scientists Citing Arthur H. Chappelka

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles