World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
62
Citations
23237
World Ranking
2551
National Ranking
1023

Forrest M. Hoffman 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 Forrest M. Hoffman 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.

Forrest M. Hoffman 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 Forrest M. Hoffman 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: 62 D-Index — 74th percentile

74% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Forrest M. Hoffman was a researcher affiliated with Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the United States. Their scientific work primarily focused on environmental science and earth and planetary sciences, with a significant number of publications in the subfields of global and planetary change, atmospheric science, environmental engineering, ecology, and soil science.

Their research covered a range of main topics including atmospheric and environmental gas dynamics, climate variability and models, climate change and permafrost, plant water relations and carbon dynamics, soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics, cryospheric studies and observations, and peatlands and wetlands ecology.

Hoffman contributed to multiple publications, with some of the recent notable papers including:

  • Spatial heterogeneity and environmental predictors of permafrost region soil organic carbon stocks, 2021, Science Advances
  • The DOE E3SM v1.1 Biogeochemistry Configuration: Description and Simulated Ecosystem-Climate Responses to Historical Changes in Forcing, 2020, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
  • Potential ecological impacts of climate intervention by reflecting sunlight to cool Earth, 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Mapping crops within the growing season across the United States, 2020, Remote Sensing of Environment
  • Beyond ecosystem modeling: A roadmap to community cyberinfrastructure for ecological data-model integration, 2020, Global Change Biology

Frequent coauthors working alongside Hoffman included:

  • Jitendra Kumar
  • Jiafu Mao
  • Xiaoying Shi
  • Nathan Collier
  • William W. Hargrove

Hoffman published regularly in a variety of scientific venues, with the most frequent publication venues being:

  • Biogeosciences
  • Nature Communications
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Best Publications

  • Global Carbon Budget 2018

    Corinne Le Quéré;Robbie M. Andrew;Pierre Friedlingstein;Stephen Sitch

  • Technical Description of version 4.0 of the Community Land Model (CLM)

    W. Oleson;M. Lawrence;B. Bonan;G. Flanner

  • The Community Land Model version 5 : description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty

    David M. Lawrence;Rosie A. Fisher;Charles D. Koven;Keith W. Oleson

  • Technical Description of the Community Land Model (CLM)

    Keith Oleson;Yongjiu Dai;B. Bonan;Mike Bosilovichm

  • Causes of variation in soil carbon simulations from CMIP5 Earth system models and comparison with observations

    K. E. O. Todd-Brown;J. T. Randerson;W. M. Post;F. M. Hoffman;F. M. Hoffman

  • Global Carbon and other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks

    Josep G. Canadell;Pedro M.S. Monteiro;Marcos H. Costa;Leticia Cotrim Da Cunha

  • Taking climate model evaluation to the next level

    Veronika Eyring;Veronika Eyring;Peter M. Cox;Gregory M. Flato;Peter J. Gleckler

  • CTFS-ForestGEO: A worldwide network monitoring forests in an era of global change

    Kristina J. Anderson-Teixeira;Kristina J. Anderson-Teixeira;Stuart J. Davies;Stuart J. Davies;Amy C. Bennett;Erika B. Gonzalez-Akre

  • Plant responses to increasing CO2 reduce estimates of climate impacts on drought severity.

    Abigail L. S. Swann;Forrest M. Hoffman;Charles D. Koven;James T. Randerson

  • Observed 20th century desert dust variability: impact on climate and biogeochemistry

    Natalie Mahowald;Silvia Kloster;S. Engelstaedter;Jefferson Keith Moore

  • The Community Land Model and Its Climate Statistics as a Component of the Community Climate System Model

    Robert Earl Dickinson;Keith W. Oleson;Gordon Bonan;Forrest Hoffman

  • Sustained climate warming drives declining marine biological productivity.

    J. Keith Moore;Weiwei Fu;Francois Primeau;Gregory L. Britten

  • The International Land Model Benchmarking (ILAMB) System: Design, Theory, and Implementation

    Nathan Collier;Forrest M. Hoffman;Forrest M. Hoffman;David M. Lawrence;Gretchen Keppel-Aleks

  • A continental strategy for the National Ecological Observatory Network

    Michael Keller;David S Schimel;William W Hargrove;Forrest M Hoffman

  • Potential of Multivariate Quantitative Methods for Delineation and Visualization of Ecoregions

    William W. Hargrove;Forrest M. Hoffman

  • Systematic assessment of terrestrial biogeochemistry in coupled climate-carbon models

    James T. Randerson;Forrest M. Hoffman;Peter Edmond Thornton;Peter Edmond Thornton;Natalie M. Mahowald

  • Spatial heterogeneity and environmental predictors of permafrost region soil organic carbon stocks

    Umakant Mishra;Gustaf Hugelius;Eitan Shelef;Yuanhe Yang

  • A framework for benchmarking land models

    Yiqi Luo;J. Randerson;G. Abramowitz;C. Bacour

  • C4MIP – The Coupled Climate–Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project: Experimental protocol for CMIP6

    Chris D. Jones;Vivek K. Arora;Pierre Friedlingstein;Laurent Bopp

  • Photoperiodic regulation of the seasonal pattern of photosynthetic capacity and the implications for carbon cycling

    William L. Bauerle;Ram Oren;Danielle A. Way;Song S. Qian

  • North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: Terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison

    D. N. Huntzinger;W. M. Post;Y. Wei;A. M. Michalak

Frequent Co-Authors

William W. Hargrove
William W. Hargrove US Forest Service
Peter E. Thornton
Peter E. Thornton Oak Ridge National Laboratory
James T. Randerson
James T. Randerson University of California, Irvine
Xiaoying Shi
Xiaoying Shi Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Jiafu Mao
Jiafu Mao Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Daniel M. Ricciuto
Daniel M. Ricciuto Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Charles D. Koven
Charles D. Koven Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Keith Lindsay
Keith Lindsay National Center for Atmospheric Research
David J. Erickson
David J. Erickson Oak Ridge National Laboratory
William J. Riley
William J. Riley Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

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 open diverse career opportunities. One popular pathway is pursuing the best online geology degree. This program emphasizes earth processes, minerals, and natural resources—skills essential for environmental consulting and resource management roles.

Geospatial technology plays a crucial role in environmental analysis, making the best GIS programs in the US valuable for those aiming to work with mapping, spatial data, and environmental planning. GIS expertise is increasingly sought after in public and private sectors.

For leadership and policy-driven careers, the best online masters in public administration equips students with skills in government, nonprofit management, and environmental policy frameworks, preparing graduates to influence sustainability initiatives at higher levels.

Understanding societal impacts on the environment is equally important, and the best online bachelors in sociology programs provide knowledge about social behaviors and structures. This insight enhances community-focused environmental work and advocacy.

Best Scientists Citing Forrest M. Hoffman

Recently Published Articles