World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
56
Citations
11912
World Ranking
3638
National Ranking
1387

Danny Marks 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 Danny Marks 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: 201 publications — 64th percentile

64% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Danny Marks 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 Danny Marks 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: 56 D-Index — 63rd percentile

63% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Danny Marks is affiliated with the Agricultural Research Service in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on environmental science and earth and planetary sciences, with notable work in atmospheric science and water science and technology.

Their research interests navigate several subfields including:

  • Atmospheric Science
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Soil Science

Marks' work covers key topics in environmental and earth sciences:

  • Cryospheric studies and observations
  • Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Climate variability and models
  • Climate change and permafrost
  • Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Flood Risk Assessment and Management
  • Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics

Their research is disseminated in several academic venues, including:

  • Hydrological Processes
  • The Cryosphere
  • Water Resources Research
  • Vadose Zone Journal
  • Computers & Geosciences

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Marks include:

  • Snow cover duration trends observed at sites and predicted by multiple models, 2020, The Cryosphere
  • From Drought to Flood: A Water Balance Analysis of the Tuolumne River Basin during Extreme Conditions (2015 - 2017), 2020, Hydrological Processes
  • The USDA-ARS Experimental Watershed Network: Evolution, Lessons Learned, Societal Benefits, and Moving Forward, 2020, Water Resources Research
  • Slope and aspect controls on soil climate: Field documentation and implications for large-scale simulation of critical zone processes, 2021, Vadose Zone Journal
  • Automated Water Supply Model (AWSM): Streamlining and standardizing application of a physically based snow model for water resources and reproducible science, 2020, Computers & Geosciences

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Marks include:

  • A. R. Hedrick
  • S. Havens
  • J. P. McNamara
  • Ernesto Trujillo
  • Micah Sandusky

Best Publications

  • The Airborne Snow Observatory: Fusion of scanning lidar, imaging spectrometer, and physically-based modeling for mapping snow water equivalent and snow albedo

    Thomas H. Painter;Daniel F. Berisford;Joseph W. Boardman;Kathryn J. Bormann

  • A comparison of geostatistical procedures for spatial analysis of precipitation in mountainous terrain

    Donald L Phillips;Jayne Dolph;Danny Marks

  • The sensitivity of snowmelt processes to climate conditions and forest cover during rain‐on‐snow: a case study of the 1996 Pacific Northwest flood

    Danny Marks;John Kimball;Dave Tingey;Tim Link

  • A spatially distributed energy balance snowmelt model for application in mountain basins

    Danny Marks;James Domingo;Dave Susong;Tim Link

  • Daily air temperature interpolated at high spatial resolution over a large mountainous region

    R. Dodson;D. Marks

  • Climate and energy exchange at the snow surface in the Alpine Region of the Sierra Nevada: 2. Snow cover energy balance

    Danny Marks;Jeff Dozier

  • The dynamics of rainfall interception by a seasonal temperate rainforest

    Timothy E. Link;Mike Unsworth;Danny Marks

  • Automated basin delineation from digital elevation data

    D. Marks;J. Dozier;J. Frew

  • Simulating wind fields and snow redistribution using terrain-based parameters to model snow accumulation and melt over a semi-arid mountain catchment

    Adam Winstral;Danny Marks

  • Solar radiation transmission through conifer canopies

    J.P. Hardy;R. Melloh;G. Koenig;D. Marks

  • Spatially distributed energy balance snowmelt modelling in a mountainous river basin: estimation of meteorological inputs and verification of model results

    David C. Garen;Danny Marks

  • The importance of canopy structure in controlling the interception loss of rainfall: Examples from a young and an old-growth Douglas-fir forest

    Thomas G. Pypker;Barbara J. Bond;Timothy E. Link;Danny Marks

  • A unified approach for process-based hydrologic modeling: 2. Model implementation and case studies

    Martyn P. Clark;Bart Nijssen;Jessica D. Lundquist;Dmitri Kavetski

  • A global perspective of regional vegetation and hydrologic sensitivities from climatic change

    Ronald P. Neilson;Danny Marks

  • The impact of coniferous forest temperature on incoming longwave radiation to melting snow.

    John W. Pomeroy;Danny Marks;Tim Link;Chad Ellis

  • An evaluation of methods for determining during-storm precipitation phase and the rain/snow transition elevation at the surface in a mountain basin

    D. Marks;A. Winstral;M. Reba;J. Pomeroy

  • ESM-SnowMIP: assessing snow models and quantifying snow-related climate feedbacks

    Gerhard Krinner;Chris Derksen;Richard Essery;Mark Flanner

  • A Sensitivity Study of Daytime Net Radiation during Snowmelt to Forest Canopy and Atmospheric Conditions

    Jean Emmanuel Sicart;John W. P Omeroy;Richard L. H. Essery;Janet Hardy

  • Comparison of algorithms for incoming atmospheric long-wave radiation

    G. N. Flerchinger;Wei Xaio;Danny Marks;T. J. Sauer

  • SNOW MAPPING AND CLASSIFICATION FROM LANDSAT THEMATIC MAPPER DATA

    Jeff Dozier;Danny Marks

Frequent Co-Authors

Timothy E. Link
Timothy E. Link University of Idaho
Gerald N. Flerchinger
Gerald N. Flerchinger Agricultural Research Service
John W. Pomeroy
John W. Pomeroy University of Saskatchewan
Mark S. Seyfried
Mark S. Seyfried Agricultural Research Service
Hans-Peter Marshall
Hans-Peter Marshall Boise State University
Richard Essery
Richard Essery University of Edinburgh
Jeff Dozier
Jeff Dozier University of California, Santa Barbara
James P. McNamara
James P. McNamara Boise State University
Michael H. Unsworth
Michael H. Unsworth Oregon State University
Roger C. Bales
Roger C. Bales University of California, Merced

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 Environmental Sciences, there are several related online degrees that can expand career opportunities. Students seeking a more straightforward entry into environmental fields might explore the easiest bachelor's degree options, which can provide foundational knowledge with a manageable workload.

Specialized degrees, such as those in Geology, offer deep insights into Earth sciences and are well-suited for environmental careers. Many reputable schools now offer geology degrees online, allowing flexibility while gaining expertise in soil, water, and mineral resources—all critical to environmental assessments.

Another growing field is Geographic Information Systems (GIS), essential for mapping and spatial data analysis. Professionals with GIS skills are in high demand for managing environmental projects, and the best GIS graduate programs provide advanced training accessible from anywhere.

For those aiming to influence environmental policy or lead sustainability initiatives, an online Master of Public Administration (MPA) may be ideal. Many institutions offer online MPA degrees designed for quick completion, preparing graduates for leadership roles in government and nonprofit sectors focused on environmental issues.

Best Scientists Citing Danny Marks

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles