World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Environmental Sciences 46 6186 5938 19 18 95 6525

Emil Cienciala publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Emil Cienciala between 1992 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Emil Cienciala published across 35 years, from 1992 to 2026, averaging 3.9 papers a year. Output peaked at 14 publications in 2023. 11 of the 136 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1992 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 14. Peak 14 publications in 2023. 1992: 3 publications 1993: 0 publications 1994: 2 publications 1995: 5 publications 1996: 1 publication 1997: 2 publications 1998: 1 publication 1999: 4 publications 2000: 3 publications 2001: 0 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 2 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 2 publications 2008: 4 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 1 publication 2011: 1 publication 2012: 3 publications 2013: 3 publications 2014: 1 publication 2015: 3 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 6 publications 2018: 9 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 4 publications 2021: 6 publications 2022: 13 publications 2023: 14 publications 2024: 13 publications 2025: 10 publications 2026: 1 publication
1992 2026

136 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Emil Cienciala: publications per year, 1992 to 2026
Year Publications
1992 3
1993 0
1994 2
1995 5
1996 1
1997 2
1998 1
1999 4
2000 3
2001 0
2002 2
2003 2
2004 1
2005 2
2006 3
2007 2
2008 4
2009 3
2010 1
2011 1
2012 3
2013 3
2014 1
2015 3
2016 5
2017 6
2018 9
2019 3
2020 4
2021 6
2022 13
2023 14
2024 13
2025 10
2026 1
Total 136
Download as CSV

Emil Cienciala 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 Emil Cienciala sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 66 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 41–50 to 690+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 617. Most scientists, 617, have 121–130 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 91–100 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
41–50 publications 690+

This scientist: 95 publications — 11th percentile

11% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
41–50 21
51–60 62
61–70 133
71–80 257
81–90 361
91–100 440 95
101–110 492
111–120 541
121–130 617
131–140 544
141–150 541
151–160 539
161–170 444
171–180 444
181–190 400
191–200 377
201–210 318
211–220 282
221–230 263
231–240 220
241–250 217
251–260 180
261–270 181
271–280 155
281–290 130
291–300 127
301–310 130
311–320 85
321–330 106
331–340 80
341–350 83
351–360 75
361–370 69
371–380 52
381–390 54
391–400 56
401–410 44
411–420 40
421–430 36
431–440 25
441–450 25
451–460 32
461–470 29
471–480 21
481–490 26
491–500 26
501–510 17
511–520 19
521–530 15
531–540 22
541–550 12
551–560 15
561–570 11
571–580 19
581–590 9
591–600 9
601–610 7
611–620 11
621–630 5
631–640 5
641–650 6
651–660 3
661–670 3
671–680 4
681–689 4
690+ 100
Download as CSV

Emil Cienciala 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 Emil Cienciala sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 126+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 348. Most scientists, 348, have 45 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 46 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 46 D-Index — 39th percentile

39% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 12
31 26
32 51
33 88
34 123
35 163
36 206
37 267
38 265
39 275
40 321
41 343
42 305
43 336
44 330
45 348
46 291 46
47 275
48 272
49 273
50 263
51 232
52 266
53 217
54 198
55 177
56 202
57 204
58 166
59 177
60 166
61 152
62 143
63 150
64 124
65 119
66 120
67 118
68 82
69 98
70 94
71 105
72 74
73 84
74 70
75 67
76 78
77 60
78 59
79 52
80 47
81 38
82 48
83 42
84 42
85 43
86 29
87 37
88 29
89 30
90 34
91 20
92 22
93 17
94 19
95 24
96 21
97 20
98 24
99 17
100 17
101 21
102 25
103 18
104 26
105 20
106 15
107 10
108 13
109 15
110 12
111 8
112 7
113 9
114 6
115 12
116 7
117 8
118 3
119 5
120 7
121 2
122 4
123 8
124 7
125 9
126+ 92
Download as CSV

Overview

Emil Cienciala is affiliated with the Czech Academy of Sciences in the Czech Republic, specializing in environmental science with a focus on global and planetary change, nature and landscape conservation, atmospheric science, insect science, and plant science.

Their research primarily addresses topics related to forest ecology and management, ecology and vegetation dynamics studies, forest management and policy, plant water relations and carbon dynamics, tree-ring climate responses, forest ecology and biodiversity studies, and fire effects on ecosystems.

Emil Cienciala has contributed to several recent publications, including:

  • Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential (2023, Nature)
  • Late-spring frost risk between 1959 and 2017 decreased in North America but increased in Europe and Asia (2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
  • The number of tree species on Earth (2022, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
  • The 2018 European heatwave led to stem dehydration but not to consistent growth reductions in forests (2022, Nature Communications)
  • Co-limitation towards lower latitudes shapes global forest diversity gradients (2022, Nature Ecology & Evolution)

The scientist frequently publishes in journals including:

  • Nature Communications
  • Ecological Applications
  • Nature
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Nature Ecology & Evolution

Collaborations form an important part of Emil Cienciala's work, with frequent co-authors including G.J. Nabuurs, Jiří Doležal, Peter B. Reich, Sergio de-Miguel, and Jean-François Bastin.

Best Publications

  • Indirect methods of large-scale forest biomass estimation

    Z. Somogyi;E. Cienciala;R. Mäkipää;P. Muukkonen

  • The number of tree species on Earth

    Unknown

  • Transpiration and whole-tree conductance in ponderosa pine trees of different heights

    Michael G. Ryan;Barbara J. Bond;Beverly E. Law;Robert M. Hubbard

  • Late-spring frost risk between 1959 and 2017 decreased in North America but increased in Europe and Asia.

    Constantin M. Zohner;Lidong Mo;Susanne S. Renner;Jens-Christian Svenning

  • Carbon storage in post-mining forest soil, the role of tree biomass and soil bioturbation.

    Jan Frouz;Václav Pižl;Emil Cienciala;Jiří Kalčík

  • Evaluation of six process‐based forest growth models using eddy‐covariance measurements of CO2 and H2O fluxes at six forest sites in Europe

    K. Kramer;I. Leinonen;H. H. Bartelink;P. Berbigier

  • Radial velocity profiles of water flow in trunks of Norway spruce and oak and the response of spruce to severing.

    Jan Čermák;Emil Cienciala;Jiří Kučera;Jan-Erik Hällgren

  • Tree sap flow and stand transpiration of two Acacia mangium plantations in Sabah, Borneo

    E Cienciala;J Kučera;A Malmer

  • The 2018 European heatwave led to stem dehydration but not to consistent growth reductions in forests

    Unknown

  • Evaporation components of a boreal forest: variations during the growing season

    A. Grelle;Angela Lundberg;A. Lindroth;A.-S. Morén

  • Individual variation of sap-flow rate in large pine and spruce trees and stand transpiration: a pilot study at the central NOPEX site

    J. Čermák;E. Cienciala;J. Kučera;A. Lindroth

  • Biomass functions applicable to Scots pine

    E. Cienciala;M. Černý;F. Tatarinov;J. Apltauer

  • Co-limitation towards lower latitudes shapes global forest diversity gradients

    Unknown

  • A questionnaire-based review of the operational use of remotely sensed data by national forest inventories

    Frank Barrett;Ronald E. McRoberts;Erkki Tomppo;Emil Cienciala

  • Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) for assessment of qualitative classification of Norway spruce in temperate forest stands

    Olga V. Brovkina;Emil Cienciala;Peter Surový;Premysl Janata

  • Application of BIOME-BGC model to managed forests: 1. Sensitivity analysis

    Fyodor A. Tatarinov;Emil Cienciala

  • Canopy transpiration from a boreal forest in Sweden during a dry year

    E. Cienciala;J. Kučera;A. Lindroth;J. Čermák

  • The analysis of physical background of tree sap flow measurement based on thermal methods

    Fyodor A Tatarinov;Jiri Kučera;Emil Cienciala

  • Water use efficiency of short-rotation Salix viminalis at leaf, tree and stand scales.

    Anders Lindroth;Emil Cienciala

  • Climate-Smart Forestry: mitigation impacts in three European regions

    Unknown

  • Hotspots of the European forests carbon cycle

    G.J. Nabuurs;E. Thürig;E. Thürig;N. Heidema;K. Armolaitis

  • Continuous long-term measurements of soil-plant-atmosphere variables at a forest site

    Lars-Christer Lundin;Sven Halldin;A. Lindroth;E. Cienciala

  • Thinning effects on pine-spruce forest transpiration in central Sweden

    Fredrik Lagergren;Harry Lankreijer;Jiri Kucera;Emil Cienciala

  • The effects of water availability on transpiration, water potential and growth of Picea abies during a growing season

    Emil Cienciala;Anders Lindroth;Jan Čermák;Jan-Erik Hällgren

Frequent Co-Authors

Anders Lindroth
Anders Lindroth Lund University
Göran Ståhl
Göran Ståhl Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Erkki Tomppo
Erkki Tomppo University of Helsinki
Gert-Jan Nabuurs
Gert-Jan Nabuurs Wageningen University & Research
Achim Grelle
Achim Grelle Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Piermaria Corona
Piermaria Corona The Canadian Real Estate Association
Bo Jellesmark Thorsen
Bo Jellesmark Thorsen University of Copenhagen
Jan Cermak
Jan Cermak Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Ronald E. McRoberts
Ronald E. McRoberts University of Minnesota
Marco Marchetti
Marco Marchetti University of Molise

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 expanding their expertise beyond environmental sciences, exploring diverse online degree options can open new career opportunities. Programs such as eds to edd programs offer advanced educational leadership pathways, ideal for individuals aiming to influence environmental policy or education at a higher level.

Similarly, combining environmental knowledge with social welfare principles through a dsw program can prepare professionals for careers addressing community-based environmental challenges and sustainability initiatives.

For students seeking flexible options, cheapest online general studies degree programs provide a cost-effective foundation that can be tailored with electives related to environmental topics, supporting diverse career goals without breaking the bank.

Additionally, those new to higher education or looking for a streamlined academic experience may consider some of the easiest bachelor degree options, which can allow quicker entry into environmental fields or related industries while building essential skills.

Best Scientists Citing Emil Cienciala

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles