World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
43
Citations
8670
World Ranking
7004
National Ranking
2498

Geoffrey I. Scott 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 Geoffrey I. Scott 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: 120 publications — 24th percentile

24% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Geoffrey I. Scott 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 Geoffrey I. Scott 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: 43 D-Index — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Geoffrey I. Scott is affiliated with the University of South Carolina in the United States and specializes primarily in Environmental Science. Their research spans several subfields including Environmental Chemistry, Oceanography, Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Ecology, and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

The scientist's work covers a variety of topics, with particular focus on Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics, Marine and Coastal Ecosystems, Microplastics and Plastic Pollution, Ocean Acidification Effects and Responses, Marine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies, Coastal and Marine Management, and Heavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity.

Recent publications include:

  • Health impacts of environmental contamination of micro- and nanoplastics: a review (2020), Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine
  • Acidification in the U.S. Southeast: Causes, Potential Consequences and the Role of the Southeast Ocean and Coastal Acidification Network (2020), Frontiers in Marine Science
  • Coastlines, Coastal Cities, and Climate Change: A Perspective on Urgent Research Needs in the United States (2021), Frontiers in Marine Science
  • Associations between exposure to cadmium, lead, mercury and mixtures and women's infertility and long-term amenorrhea (2023), Archives of Public Health
  • A comparative study on turnaround leadership in higher education and the successful implementation of the UN's sustainable development goals (2022), International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education

The scientist has collaborated frequently with the following researchers:

  • Dwayne E. Porter
  • Paul A. Sandifer
  • Qiang Zhang
  • Saurabh Chatterjee
  • Shuo Xiao

Geoffrey I. Scott has contributed to several renowned publication venues in their field. These include:

  • Frontiers in Marine Science
  • International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
  • Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine
  • Archives of Public Health
  • Frontiers in Public Health

In addition to journal articles, the scientist has contributed to book publications, including a work published by UNESCO titled Magnitude and extent of sediment toxicity in selected estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia (2021).

Best Publications

  • Research needs for the risk assessment of health and environmental effects of endocrine disruptors: a report of the U.S. EPA-sponsored workshop.

    R J Kavlock;G P Daston;C DeRosa;P Fenner-Crisp

  • Are harmful algal blooms becoming the greatest inland water quality threat to public health and aquatic ecosystems

    Bryan W. Brooks;James M. Lazorchak;Meredith D.A. Howard;Mari Vaughn V. Johnson

  • Toxicity of pesticides to aquatic microorganisms: A review

    Unknown

  • Health impacts of environmental contamination of micro- and nanoplastics: a review.

    Baorong Jiang;Baorong Jiang;Alexandra E Kauffman;Lei Li;Wayne McFee

  • Linkages between tidal creek ecosystems and the landscape and demographic attributes of their watersheds

    A.Frederick Holland;Denise M Sanger;Christopher P Gawle;Scott B Lerberg

  • The determination and use of condition index of oysters

    David R. Lawrence;Geoffrey I. Scott

  • Using geographic information systems and regression analysis to evaluate relationships between land use and fecal coliform bacterial pollution

    H. Kelsey;D.E. Porter;G. Scott;G. Scott;M. Neet

  • Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries: II. Distribution of organic contaminants.

    D. M. Sanger;A. F. Holland;G. I. Scott

  • Pilot estuarine mesocosm study on the environmental fate of Silver nanomaterials leached from consumer products.

    Danielle Cleveland;Stephen E. Long;Paul L. Pennington;Emily Cooper

  • Tidal creek and salt marsh sediments in South Carolina coastal estuaries: I. Distribution of trace metals.

    D. M. Sanger;A. F. Holland;G. I. Scott

  • Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in storm runoff from urban and coastal South Carolina.

    Barnabe Ngabe;Terry F. Bidleman;Geoffrey I. Scott

  • Factors influencing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon distributions in South Carolina estuarine sediments

    John R. Kucklick;John R. Kucklick;Scott K. Sivertsen;Marion Sanders;Geoffrey I. Scott

  • Assessment of risk reduction strategies for the management of agricultural nonpoint source pesticide runoff in estuarine ecosystems.

    G. I. Scott;M. H. Fulton;D. W. Moore;E. F. Wirth

  • In situ-based effects measures: Determining the ecological relevance of measured responses

    Donald J Baird;Steven S Brown;Laurent Lagadic;Matthias Liess

  • F+RNA coliphage typing for microbial source tracking in surface waters

    J. Stewart-Pullaro;J. Stewart-Pullaro;J.W. Daugomah;D.E. Chestnut;D.A. Graves

  • Impact of Climate Change on Vibrio vulnificus Abundance and Exposure Risk

    Reem Deeb;Daniel Tufford;Geoffrey I. Scott;Janet Gooch Moore

  • Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) egg yolk concentrations of persistent organic pollutants and lipid increase during the last stage of embryonic development

    Juan José Alava;Jennifer M. Keller;John R. Kucklick;Jeanette Wyneken

  • Identification of sources of Escherichia coli in South Carolina estuaries using antibiotic resistance analysis

    Laura F Webster;Brian C Thompson;Michael H Fulton;David E Chestnut

  • A comparison and evaluation of field and laboratory toxicity tests with fenvalerate on an estuarine crustacean

    Douglas S. Baughman;David W. Moore;Geoffrey I. Scott

  • Maternal transfer of contaminants: case study of the excretion of three polychlorinated biphenyl congeners and technical-grade endosulfan into eggs by white Leghorn chickens (Gallus domesticus).

    Timothy A. Bargar;Geoffrey I. Scott;George P. Cobb

  • Lethal and sublethal effects of malathion on three life stages of the grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio

    Peter B Key;Michael H Fulton;Geoffrey I Scott;Shawn L Layman

  • Impact of urbanization on high-salinity estuaries in the southeastern United States

    F. John Vernberg;W.B. Vernberg;E. Blood;A. Fortner

  • Toxicological studies in tropical ecosystems: an ecotoxicological risk assessment of pesticide runoff in South Florida estuarine ecosystems.

    Scott Gi;Fulton Mh;Wirth Ef;Chandler Gt

  • Determination of acute mortality in adults and sublethal embryo responses of Palaemonetes pugio to endosulfan and methoprene exposure.

    E.F Wirth;S.A Lund;M.H Fulton;G.I Scott

Frequent Co-Authors

G. Thomas Chandler
G. Thomas Chandler University of South Carolina
Daniel Schlenk
Daniel Schlenk University of California, Riverside
Daniela B. Friedman
Daniela B. Friedman University of South Carolina
Nancy D. Denslow
Nancy D. Denslow University of Florida
Bryan W. Brooks
Bryan W. Brooks Baylor University
Keith A. Maruya
Keith A. Maruya Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Jamie R. Lead
Jamie R. Lead University of South Carolina
Jörg E. Drewes
Jörg E. Drewes Technical University of Munich
James M. Lazorchak
James M. Lazorchak Environmental Protection Agency
Euan D. Reavie
Euan D. Reavie University of Minnesota, Duluth

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

Pursuing a degree in Environmental Sciences opens doors to various online educational paths that complement this field. For those interested in advancing their expertise with minimal financial burden, exploring fully funded dsw programs online can provide inspiration on how fully funded opportunities exist in other disciplines, encouraging a search for similar programs in environmental areas.

Students seeking flexibility and broad skill development might consider a low cost online general studies degree, which offers foundational knowledge applicable in environmental careers while maintaining affordability.

For those concerned about balancing coursework and career goals, identifying the easiest bachelor's degree to get can help streamline the educational journey without sacrificing essential learning outcomes. This approach can be beneficial for non-traditional students or those seeking quicker entry into the workforce.

Specialized fields like geology align closely with environmental sciences, and exploring online geology degrees can broaden your understanding of earth systems critical to environmental research and careers. These programs often provide practical skills for roles in conservation, resource management, and sustainability.

Best Scientists Citing Geoffrey I. Scott

Trending Scientists