World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
58
Citations
10613
World Ranking
3315
National Ranking
255

David M. Schultz 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 M. Schultz 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: 261 publications — 80th percentile

80% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David M. Schultz 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 M. Schultz 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: 58 D-Index — 67th percentile

67% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David M. Schultz is affiliated with the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily lies within the fields of Earth and Planetary Sciences and Environmental Science, with significant contributions to several subfields including Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change, Environmental Engineering, Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, and Pharmacology.

The topics frequently addressed in their work encompass Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations, Climate variability and models, Tropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research, Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation, Precipitation Measurement and Analysis, Wind and Air Flow Studies, and COVID-19 epidemiological studies.

Schultz has published extensively in several academic venues. The most frequent publication outlets include Monthly Weather Review, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Weather and Forecasting, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), and SSRN Electronic Journal.

Their notable recent papers include:

  • On the Use of Indices and Parameters in Forecasting Severe Storms, 2021, E-Journal of Severe Storms Meteorology
  • Geological Society of London Scientific Statement: what the geological record tells us about our present and future climate, 2020, Journal of the Geological Society
  • An 18-year climatology of derechos in Germany, 2020, Natural hazards and earth system sciences
  • Damage classification and recovery analysis of the Chongqing, China, floods of August 2020 based on social-media data, 2021, Journal of Cleaner Production
  • Severe Convective Windstorms in Europe: Climatology, Preconvective Environments, and Convective Mode, 2020, Weather and Forecasting

David M. Schultz has collaborated frequently with colleagues including John McBeth, William G Dixon, Belay Birlie Yimer, Thomas House, and T.D. Kelly.

Their contributions also include published books, such as the work released by Transcript Verlag titled Deutscher Gangsta-Rap III in 2022.

Best Publications

  • The Use of Moisture Flux Convergence in Forecasting Convective Initiation: Historical and Operational Perspectives

    Peter C. Banacos;David M. Schultz

  • Evolution of the U.S. Tornado Database: 1954–2003

    Stephanie M. Verbout;Harold E. Brooks;Lance M. Leslie;David M. Schultz

  • A review of operational, regional-scale, chemical weather forecasting models in Europe

    J. Kukkonen;T. Olsson;T. Olsson;D. M. Schultz;D. M. Schultz;D. M. Schultz;A. Baklanov

  • The use and misuse of conditional symmetric instability

    David M. Schultz;Philip N. Schumacher

  • U.s. Geological survey core drilling on the atlantic shelf.

    John C. Hathaway;C. Wylie Poag;Page C. Valentine;Frank T. Manheim

  • False Alarms and Close Calls: A Conceptual Model of Warning Accuracy

    Lindsey R. Barnes;Eve C. Gruntfest;Mary H. Hayden;David M. Schultz

  • Improving Snowfall Forecasting by Diagnosing Snow Density

    Paul J. Roebber;Sara L. Bruening;David M. Schultz;John V. Cortinas

  • On the use of indices and parameters in forecasting severe storms

    Charles A. Doswell Iii;David M. Schultz

  • The Effect of Large-Scale Flow on Low-Level Frontal Structure and Evolution in Midlatitude Cyclones

    David M. Schultz;Daniel Keyser;Lance F. Bosart

  • Toward Improved Prediction: High-Resolution and Ensemble Modeling Systems in Operations

    Paul J. Roebber;David M. Schultz;Brian A. Colle;David J. Stensrud

  • The 1993 Superstorm Cold Surge: Frontal Structure, Gap Flow, and Tropical Impact

    David M. Schultz;W. Edward Bracken;Lance F. Bosart;Gregory J. Hakim

  • Planetary- and Synoptic-Scale Signatures Associated with Central American Cold Surges

    David M. Schultz;W. Edward Bracken;Lance F. Bosart

  • The Structure and Evolution of Gap Outflow over the Gulf of Tehuantepec, Mexico

    W. James Steenburgh;David M. Schultz;Brian A. Colle

  • Severe Convective Storms in Europe: Ten Years of Research and Education at the European Severe Storms Laboratory

    Pieter Groenemeijer;Tomáš Púčik;Alois M. Holzer;Bogdan Antonescu

  • Reexamining the Cold Conveyor Belt

    David M. Schultz

  • A Review of Cold Fronts with Prefrontal Troughs and Wind Shifts

    David M. Schultz

  • Tornadoes in Europe: An Underestimated Threat

    Bogdan Antonescu;David M. Schultz;Alois Holzer;Pieter Groenemeijer

  • Climatology of Severe Hail in Finland: 1930–2006

    Jari Petteri Tuovinen;Ari Juhani Punkka;Jenni Rauhala;Harri Hohti

  • CORRIGENDUM: False Alarm Rate or False Alarm Ratio?

    Lindsey R. Barnes;David M. Schultz;Eve C. Gruntfest;Mary H. Hayden

  • Synoptic regulation of the 3 May 1999 tornado outbreak

    Paul J. Roebber;David M. Schultz;Romualdo Romero

  • The Intricacies of Instabilities

    David M. Schultz;Philip N. Schumacher;Charles A. Doswell

  • REVIEW The Use and Misuse of Conditional Symmetric Instability

    David M. Schultz;Philip N. Schumacher

  • FORECASTER'S FORUM Toward Improved Prediction: High-Resolution and Ensemble Modeling Systems in Operations

    Paul J. Roebber;David M. Schultz;Brian A. Colle;David J. Stensrud

Frequent Co-Authors

Geraint Vaughan
Geraint Vaughan University of Manchester
Robert M. Rauber
Robert M. Rauber University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Walter A. Robinson
Walter A. Robinson North Carolina State University
Suzanne L. Gray
Suzanne L. Gray University of Reading
Lance F. Bosart
Lance F. Bosart University at Albany, State University of New York
Caroline Sanders
Caroline Sanders University of Manchester
W. James Steenburgh
W. James Steenburgh University of Utah
Harold E. Brooks
Harold E. Brooks National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Charles A. Doswell
Charles A. Doswell University of Oklahoma
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Laxmaiah Manchikanti University of Louisville

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

Exploring Environmental Sciences in the USA often leads students to consider related fields that complement their core studies. For those seeking a streamlined academic route, some programs are recognized as easy bachelor degrees, offering a balanced mix of theory and practical skills without overwhelming intensity.

For students keen on earth systems and natural processes, pursuing an online geoscience degree can provide specialized knowledge accessible from anywhere. This flexibility is essential for those balancing work or other commitments.

Another critical area is Geographic Information Systems (GIS), a tool widely used in environmental monitoring and planning. Many students benefit from programs recognized among the best GIS programs in the US, which emphasize spatial analysis skills necessary for modern environmental careers.

Graduates aiming for leadership roles in environmental policy and management may find value in a 1 year MPA online, which offers a fast-tracked approach to advanced public administration and policy expertise.

Best Scientists Citing David M. Schultz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles