World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
63
Citations
15928
World Ranking
2458
National Ranking
987

David J. Hofmann 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 David J. Hofmann 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: 158 publications — 46th percentile

46% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David J. Hofmann 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 David J. Hofmann 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: 63 D-Index — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2006 - Fellow of American Geophysical Union (AGU)

Overview

David J. Hofmann was affiliated with the University of Wyoming in the United States. Their research primarily focused on the field of Neuroscience, with a significant emphasis on subfields such as Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology and Political Science, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics, and Biomedical Engineering.

Their research work covered a variety of topics, including:

  • Neural dynamics and brain function
  • EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Economic and Social Issues
  • Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Stochastic dynamics and bifurcation
  • Muscle activation and electromyography studies

David J. Hofmann contributed to academic literature through numerous publications. Some of their recent papers included:

  • Ultrafast population coding and axo-somatic compartmentalization, 2022, published in PLoS Computational Biology
  • Estimating muscle activation from EMG using deep learning-based dynamical systems models, 2022, Journal of Neural Engineering
  • Brain and body energy metabolism and potential for treatment of psychiatric disorders, 2025, Nature Mental Health
  • Upper-limit agricultural dietary exposure to streptomycin in the laboratory reduces learning and foraging in bumblebees, 2022, Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences
  • Estimating muscle activation from EMG using deep learning-based dynamical systems models, 2021, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

Their frequent co-authors included Ulrich Petschow, Lilianne R. Mujica-Parodi, Thomas Korbun, Sophia I. Thomopoulos, and Jonathan Ipser.

David J. Hofmann published extensively in several venues, notably:

  • Ökologisches Wirtschaften - Fachzeitschrift
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • PLoS Computational Biology
  • SSRN Electronic Journal
  • Journal of Neural Engineering

During their career, Hofmann received recognition as a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union in 2006.

Best Publications

  • Climate Forcing by Anthropogenic Aerosols

    R. J. Charlson;S. E. Schwartz;J. M. Hales;R. D. Cess

  • Ozone destruction through heterogeneous chemistry following the eruption of El Chichón

    David J. Hofmann;Susan Solomon

  • Thirty years of in situ stratospheric aerosol size distribution measurements from Laramie, Wyoming (41°N), using balloon-borne instruments

    T. Deshler;M. E. Hervig;D. J. Hofmann;J. M. Rosen

  • Increase in lower-stratospheric water vapour at a mid-latitude Northern Hemisphere site from 1981 to 1994

    S. J. Oltmans;D. J. Hofmann

  • The increase in stratospheric water vapor from balloonborne, frostpoint hygrometer measurements at Washington, D.C., and Boulder, Colorado

    Samuel J. Oltmans;Holger Vömel;David J. Hofmann;Karen H. Rosenlof

  • Increase in the stratospheric background sulfuric acid aerosol mass in the past 10 years.

    D. J. Hofmann

  • Pinatubo and pre-Pinatubo optical-depth spectra: Mauna Loa measurements, comparisons, inferred particle size distributions, radiative effects, and relationship to lidar data

    P. B. Russell;J. M. Livingston;E. G. Dutton;R. F. Pueschel

  • The role of carbon dioxide in climate forcing from 1979 to 2004: introduction of the Annual Greenhouse Gas Index

    D. J. Hofmann;J. H. Butler;E. J. Dlugokencky;J. W. Elkins

  • Balloonborne measurements of the Pinatubo aerosol size distribution and volatility at Laramie, Wyoming during the summer of 1991

    T. Deshler;D. J. Hofmann;B. J. Johnson;W. R. Rozier

  • Stratospheric sulfuric acid fraction and mass estimate for the 1982 volcanic eruption of El Chichon

    D. J. Hofmann;J. M. Rosen

  • Stratospheric Aerosol Measurements III: Optical Model Calculations

    R. G. Pinnick;J. M. Rosen;D. J. Hofmann

  • Balloon-borne observations of the development and vertical structure of the Antarctic ozone hole in 1986

    D. J. Hofmann;J. W. Harder;S. R. Rolf;J. M. Rosen

  • Increase in background stratospheric aerosol observed with lidar at Mauna Loa Observatory and Boulder, Colorado

    David Hofmann;David Hofmann;John Barnes;Michael O'Neill;Michael O'Neill;Michael Trudeau;Michael Trudeau

  • Stratospheric cloud observations during formation of the Antarctic ozone hole in 1989

    D. J. Hofmann;T. Deshler

  • Stratospheric aerosol measurements. I - Time variations at northern midlatitudes

    D. J. Hofmann;J. M. Rosen;T. J. Pepin;R. G. Pinnick

  • Midlatitude lidar backscatter to mass, area, and extinction conversion model based on in situ aerosol measurements from 1980 to 1987.

    Horst Jäger;David Hofmann

  • Ozone loss in the lower stratosphere over the United States in 1992-1993: Evidence for heterogeneous chemistry on the Pinatubo aerosol

    D. J. Hofmann;S. J. Oltmans;W. D. Komhyr;J. M. Harris

  • Four decades of ozonesonde measurements over Antarctica

    Susan Solomon;Robert W. Portmann;Toru Sasaki;David J. Hofmann

  • Trends in stratospheric and free tropospheric ozone

    N. R. P. Harris;G. Ancellet;L. Bishop;D. J. Hofmann

  • The evolution of the dehydration in the Antarctic stratospheric vortex

    H. Vömel;S. J. Oltmans;D. J. Hofmann;T. Deshler

  • Ten years of ozonesonde measurements at the south pole: Implications for recovery of springtime Antarctic ozone

    D. J. Hofmann;S. J. Oltmans;J. M. Harris;B. J. Johnson

Frequent Co-Authors

Terry Deshler
Terry Deshler University of Wyoming
M. P. McCormick
M. P. McCormick Langley Research Center
Frank Arnold
Frank Arnold Max Planck Society
Richard McKenzie
Richard McKenzie National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research
Ellsworth G. Dutton
Ellsworth G. Dutton Earth System Research Laboratory
David W. Fahey
David W. Fahey National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
James B. Pollack
James B. Pollack Ames Research Center
Owen B. Toon
Owen B. Toon University of Colorado Boulder
Yasunobu Iwasaka
Yasunobu Iwasaka University of Shiga Prefecture

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 broaden career opportunities. For example, pursuing an dsw programs online offers a path into environmental social work, addressing how communities interact with and are affected by environmental issues.

Individuals unsure about specializing immediately might consider an online general studies degree affordable option. This flexible approach allows students to tailor coursework while maintaining affordability, often incorporating environmental subjects.

For those prioritizing ease and quicker degree completion, exploring what's the easiest bachelor's degree to get can be helpful. While Environmental Sciences demands strong dedication, combining it with easier complimentary courses can balance workload effectively.

Lastly, for a more specialized focus, an online geoscience degree offers targeted knowledge of earth systems, complementing environmental studies and enhancing job prospects in research and consulting roles.

Best Scientists Citing David J. Hofmann

Recently Published Articles