World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
65
Citations
11250
World Ranking
2266
National Ranking
176

E. A. Lucek 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 E. A. Lucek 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: 280 publications — 83rd percentile

83% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

E. A. Lucek 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 E. A. Lucek 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: 65 D-Index — 78th percentile

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

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

Best Publications

  • Cluster observations of electron holes in association with magnetotail reconnection and comparison to simulations

    C. Cattell;J. Dombeck;J. Wygant;J. F. Drake

  • The Foreshock

    Unknown

  • Cluster observations of an intense normal component of the electric field at a thin reconnecting current sheet in the tail and its role in the shock-like acceleration of the ion fluid into the separatrix region

    J. R. Wygant;C. A. Cattell;R. Lysak;Y. Song

  • Joint observations by Cluster satellites of bursty bulk flows in the magnetotail

    J. B. Cao;Y. D Ma;G. Parks;H. Reme

  • Properties of magnetosheath mirror modes observed by Cluster and their response to changes in plasma parameters

    Jan Soucek;Jan Soucek;Elizabeth Lucek;Iannis Dandouras

  • Quasi-perpendicular Shock Structure and Processes

    S. D. Bale;M. A. Balikhin;T. S. Horbury;V. V. Krasnoselskikh

  • The Double Star magnetic field investigation: instrument design, performance and highlights of the first year's observations

    C. Carr;P. Brown;T. L. Zhang;J. Gloag

  • Supermagnetosonic Jets behind a Collisionless Quasiparallel Shock

    H. Hietala;Tiera V. Laitinen;K. Andreeova;R. Vainio

  • Heliospheric magnetic field polarity inversions at high heliographic latitudes

    A. Balogh;R. J. Forsyth;E. A. Lucek;T. S. Horbury

  • Multi-point observations of the Hall electromagnetic field and secondary island formation during magnetic reconnection

    J. P. Eastwood;T.-D. Phan;F. S. Mozer;M. A. Shay

  • Quasi-parallel Shock Structure and Processes

    D. Burgess;E. A. Lucek;M. Scholer;S. D. Bale

  • Evolution of dipolarization in the near-Earth current sheet induced by Earthward rapid flux transport

    R. Nakamura;A. Retino;W. Baumjohann;M. Volwerk

  • Motion of observed structures calculated from multi-point magnetic field measurements: Application to Cluster

    Q. Q. Shi;C. Shen;M. W. Dunlop;Z. Y. Pu

  • Observations of multiple X‐line structure in the Earth's magnetotail current sheet: A Cluster case study

    Jonathan P. Eastwood;D. G. Sibeck;J. A. Slavin;M. L. Goldstein

  • Ion composition and pressure changes in storm time and nonstorm substorms in the vicinity of the near-Earth neutral line

    L. M. Kistler;C. G. Mouikis;X. Cao;H. Frey

  • Supermagnetosonic subsolar magnetosheath jets and their effects: from the solar wind to the ionospheric convection

    H. Hietala;N. Partamies;T. V. Laitinen;L. B. N. Clausen

  • Evidence for magnetic reconnection initiated in the magnetosheath

    T. D. Phan;G. Paschmann;C. Twitty;F. S. Mozer

  • Cluster observations of waves in the whistler frequency range associated with magnetic reconnection in the Earth's magnetotail

    X. H. Wei;J. B. Cao;G. C. Zhou;O. Santolík

  • Cluster observations of an ion-scale current sheet in the magnetotail under the presence of a guide field

    R. Nakamura;W. Baumjohann;M. Fujimoto;Y. Asano

  • Cluster observations of hot flow anomalies

    E. A. Lucek;T. S. Horbury;A. Balogh;I. Dandouras

  • Satellite observations of separator-line geometry of three-dimensional magnetic reconnection

    C. J. Xiao;X. G. Wang;X. G. Wang;Z. Y. Pu;Z. W. Ma;Z. W. Ma

  • Cluster observations of traveling compression regions in the near‐tail

    J. A. Slavin;E. I. Tanskanen;M. Hesse;C. J. Owen

  • Cluster observations of the Earth's quasi‐parallel bow shock

    E. A. Lucek;T. S. Horbury;I. Dandouras;H. Rème

Frequent Co-Authors

Iannis Dandouras
Iannis Dandouras British Antarctic Survey
H. Rème
H. Rème Paul Sabatier University
Andrew Fazakerley
Andrew Fazakerley University College London
André Balogh
André Balogh Imperial College London
Wolfgang Baumjohann
Wolfgang Baumjohann Austrian Academy of Sciences
Christopher J. Owen
Christopher J. Owen University College London
Rumi Nakamura
Rumi Nakamura Austrian Academy of Sciences
B. Klecker
B. Klecker Max Planck Society
L. M. Kistler
L. M. Kistler University of New Hampshire
Mats André
Mats André Swedish Institute of Space Physics

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 doors to diverse career paths, many of which can be enhanced with further education. For those interested in advancing their qualifications, exploring accredited eds to edd programs is a smart step. These programs offer advanced research and leadership skills valuable in academic or policy-making roles related to environmental issues.

For professionals aiming to incorporate social work aspects into environmental health, finding affordable programs like dsw programs online can support this unique intersection. Such degrees prepare graduates to address social determinants of environmental challenges in communities.

Students interested in a broad-based education that complements environmental science may consider the best affordable online general studies degree programs. These flexible programs allow for customization and interdisciplinary learning, useful for roles that require diverse skill sets.

Finally, for those beginning their journey or seeking a more accessible starting point, knowing what's the easiest bachelor's degree to get can help balance workload and interests while still building a solid foundation in environmental sciences and related fields.

Best Scientists Citing E. A. Lucek

Recently Published Articles