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
Molecular Biology 47 2707 2454 211 193 104 18344

Ian Sillitoe publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Ian Sillitoe between 1999 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Ian Sillitoe published across 27 years, from 1999 to 2025, averaging 4.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 17 publications in 2022. 9 of the 124 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1999 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 17. Peak 17 publications in 2022. 1999: 2 publications 2000: 1 publication 2001: 4 publications 2002: 3 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 2 publications 2005: 1 publication 2006: 0 publications 2007: 1 publication 2008: 1 publication 2009: 3 publications 2010: 0 publications 2011: 3 publications 2012: 5 publications 2013: 0 publications 2014: 4 publications 2015: 10 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 6 publications 2018: 2 publications 2019: 8 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 8 publications 2022: 17 publications 2023: 11 publications 2024: 8 publications 2025: 1 publication
1999 2025

124 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Ian Sillitoe: publications per year, 1999 to 2025
Year Publications
1999 2
2000 1
2001 4
2002 3
2003 2
2004 2
2005 1
2006 0
2007 1
2008 1
2009 3
2010 0
2011 3
2012 5
2013 0
2014 4
2015 10
2016 9
2017 6
2018 2
2019 8
2020 12
2021 8
2022 17
2023 11
2024 8
2025 1
Total 124
Download as CSV

Ian Sillitoe publication distribution in Molecular Biology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Molecular Biology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ian Sillitoe sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
50 100 150
Bar chart with 53 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 47–56 to 564+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 177. Most scientists, 177, have 117–126 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 564 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 97–106 publications, is where this scientist sits. 47–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–66 publications: 17 scientists 67–76 publications: 65 scientists 77–86 publications: 90 scientists 87–96 publications: 125 scientists 97–106 publications: 131 scientists 107–116 publications: 162 scientists 117–126 publications: 177 scientists 127–136 publications: 158 scientists 137–146 publications: 158 scientists 147–156 publications: 146 scientists 157–166 publications: 159 scientists 167–176 publications: 131 scientists 177–186 publications: 110 scientists 187–196 publications: 112 scientists 197–206 publications: 100 scientists 207–216 publications: 89 scientists 217–226 publications: 98 scientists 227–236 publications: 74 scientists 237–246 publications: 72 scientists 247–256 publications: 63 scientists 257–266 publications: 53 scientists 267–276 publications: 54 scientists 277–286 publications: 49 scientists 287–296 publications: 52 scientists 297–306 publications: 43 scientists 307–316 publications: 46 scientists 317–326 publications: 41 scientists 327–336 publications: 42 scientists 337–346 publications: 31 scientists 347–356 publications: 28 scientists 357–366 publications: 29 scientists 367–376 publications: 26 scientists 377–386 publications: 24 scientists 387–396 publications: 24 scientists 397–406 publications: 14 scientists 407–416 publications: 13 scientists 417–426 publications: 20 scientists 427–436 publications: 12 scientists 437–446 publications: 20 scientists 447–456 publications: 11 scientists 457–466 publications: 10 scientists 467–476 publications: 14 scientists 477–486 publications: 14 scientists 487–496 publications: 10 scientists 497–506 publications: 13 scientists 507–516 publications: 13 scientists 517–526 publications: 2 scientists 527–536 publications: 4 scientists 537–546 publications: 6 scientists 547–556 publications: 8 scientists 557–563 publications: 6 scientists 564+ publications: 100 scientists
47–56 publications 564+

This scientist: 104 publications — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 564 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Molecular Biology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 3,076 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
47–56 7
57–66 17
67–76 65
77–86 90
87–96 125
97–106 131 104
107–116 162
117–126 177
127–136 158
137–146 158
147–156 146
157–166 159
167–176 131
177–186 110
187–196 112
197–206 100
207–216 89
217–226 98
227–236 74
237–246 72
247–256 63
257–266 53
267–276 54
277–286 49
287–296 52
297–306 43
307–316 46
317–326 41
327–336 42
337–346 31
347–356 28
357–366 29
367–376 26
377–386 24
387–396 24
397–406 14
407–416 13
417–426 20
427–436 12
437–446 20
447–456 11
457–466 10
467–476 14
477–486 14
487–496 10
497–506 13
507–516 13
517–526 2
527–536 4
537–546 6
547–556 8
557–563 6
564+ 100
Download as CSV

Ian Sillitoe D-index placement in Molecular Biology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Molecular Biology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ian Sillitoe sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
25 50 75 100 125
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 40–41 to 145+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 131. Most scientists, 131, have 64–65 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 145 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 46–47 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 40–41 D-Index: 36 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 101 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 115 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 121 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 118 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 130 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 106 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 116 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 113 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 129 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 120 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 105 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 131 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 95 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 97 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 106 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 83 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 89 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 77 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 70 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 73 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 60 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 48 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 45 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 50 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 31 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 51 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 43 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 39 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 41 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 29 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 33 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 35 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 20 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 38 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 19 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 28 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 13 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 23 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 15 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 11 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 21 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 14 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 9 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 16 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 7 scientists 144 D-Index: 7 scientists 145+ D-Index: 100 scientists
40–41 D-Index 145+

This scientist: 47 D-Index — 12th percentile

12% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 145 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Molecular Biology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 3,076 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
40–41 36
42–43 101
44–45 115
46–47 121 47
48–49 118
50–51 130
52–53 106
54–55 116
56–57 113
58–59 129
60–61 120
62–63 105
64–65 131
66–67 95
68–69 97
70–71 106
72–73 83
74–75 89
76–77 77
78–79 70
80–81 73
82–83 60
84–85 48
86–87 45
88–89 50
90–91 31
92–93 51
94–95 43
96–97 38
98–99 39
100–101 41
102–103 29
104–105 33
106–107 35
108–109 20
110–111 38
112–113 19
114–115 28
116–117 13
118–119 23
120–121 16
122–123 15
124–125 11
126–127 21
128–129 7
130–131 13
132–133 14
134–135 17
136–137 9
138–139 8
140–141 16
142–143 7
144 7
145+ 100
Download as CSV

Overview

Ian Sillitoe is affiliated with University College London in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily spans the field of Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with a focus on Molecular Biology, Materials Chemistry, Infectious Diseases, Spectroscopy, and Animal Science and Zoology.

The scientist's work covers several main topics, including Machine Learning in Bioinformatics, Protein Structure and Dynamics, Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks, Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies, RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms, Enzyme Structure and Function, and SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research.

Ian Sillitoe has contributed to a number of publications. Notable recent papers include:

  • InterPro in 2022, published in Nucleic Acids Research, 2022
  • The InterPro protein families and domains database: 20 years on, published in Nucleic Acids Research, 2020
  • CATH: increased structural coverage of functional space, published in Nucleic Acids Research, 2020
  • SARS-CoV-2 spike protein predicted to form complexes with host receptor protein orthologues from a broad range of mammals, published in Scientific Reports, 2020
  • Contrastive learning on protein embeddings enlightens midnight zone, published in NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics, 2022

The scientist frequently publishes in venues such as Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Nucleic Acids Research, Bioinformatics, and Scientific Reports.

Frequent co-authors in their research work include:

  • Nicola Bordin
  • Christine Orengo
  • Vaishali Waman
  • Neeladri Sen

Best Publications

  • The InterPro protein families and domains database: 20 years on.

    Matthias Blum;Hsin Yu Chang;Sara Chuguransky;Tiago Grego

  • InterPro in 2017-beyond protein family and domain annotations

    Robert D. Finn;Teresa K. Attwood;Patricia C. Babbitt;Alex Bateman

  • InterPro in 2019: improving coverage, classification and access to protein sequence annotations.

    Alex L. Mitchell;Teresa K. Attwood;Patricia C. Babbitt;Matthias Blum

  • The InterPro protein families database: the classification resource after 15 years

    Alex L. Mitchell;Hsin-Yu Chang;Louise C. Daugherty;Matthew Fraser

  • CATH: comprehensive structural and functional annotations for genome sequences

    Ian Sillitoe;Tony E. Lewis;Alison L. Cuff;Sayoni Das

  • An expanded evaluation of protein function prediction methods shows an improvement in accuracy

    Yuxiang Jiang;Tal Ronnen Oron;Wyatt T. Clark;Asma R. Bankapur

  • The CAFA challenge reports improved protein function prediction and new functional annotations for hundreds of genes through experimental screens

    Naihui Zhou;Yuxiang Jiang;Timothy R. Bergquist;Alexandra J. Lee

  • CATH: increased structural coverage of functional space.

    Ian Sillitoe;Nicola Bordin;Natalie Dawson;Vaishali P Waman

  • CATH: an expanded resource to predict protein function through structure and sequence.

    Natalie L. Dawson;Tony E. Lewis;Sayoni Das;Jonathan G. Lees

  • The CATH domain structure database: new protocols and classification levels give a more comprehensive resource for exploring evolution.

    Lesley H. Greene;Tony E. Lewis;Sarah Addou;Alison L. Cuff

  • The CATH database: an extended protein family resource for structural and functional genomics

    Frances M. G. Pearl;C. F. Bennett;James E. Bray;Andrew P. Harrison

  • The CATH Domain Structure Database and related resources Gene3D and DHS provide comprehensive domain family information for genome analysis

    Frances M. G. Pearl;Annabel E. Todd;Ian Sillitoe;Mark Dibley

  • An expanded evaluation of protein function prediction methods shows an improvement in accuracy

    Yuxiang Jiang;Tal Ronnen Oron;Wyatt T Clark;Asma R Bankapur

  • New functional families (FunFams) in CATH to improve the mapping of conserved functional sites to 3D structures

    Ian Sillitoe;Alison L. Cuff;Benoit H. Dessailly;Natalie L. Dawson

  • Assigning genomic sequences to CATH.

    Frances M. G. Pearl;David A. Lee;James E. Bray;Ian Sillitoe

  • The CATH classification revisited--architectures reviewed and new ways to characterize structural divergence in superfamilies.

    Alison L. Cuff;Ian Sillitoe;Tony E. Lewis;Oliver Redfern

  • Analysis and assessment of ab initio three‐dimensional prediction, secondary structure, and contacts prediction

    C A Orengo;J E Bray;Tim Hubbard;L LoConte

  • MSAViewer: interactive JavaScript visualization of multiple sequence alignments

    Guy Yachdav;Sebastian Wilzbach;Benedikt Rauscher;Robert Sheridan

  • Gene3D: Extensive prediction of globular domains in proteins.

    Tony E. Lewis;Ian Sillitoe;Natalie L. Dawson;Su Datt Lam;Su Datt Lam

  • Additional file 1 of An expanded evaluation of protein function prediction methods shows an improvement in accuracy

    Yuxiang Jiang;Tal Ronnen Oron;Wyatt T. Clark;Asma R. Bankapur

Frequent Co-Authors

Christine A. Orengo
Christine A. Orengo University College London
Janet M. Thornton
Janet M. Thornton European Bioinformatics Institute
David A. Lee
David A. Lee Queen Mary University of London
Julian Gough
Julian Gough University of Bristol
David T. Jones
David T. Jones University College London
Christophe Dessimoz
Christophe Dessimoz University College London
Burkhard Rost
Burkhard Rost Technical University of Munich
Michael J.E. Sternberg
Michael J.E. Sternberg Imperial College London
Silvio C. E. Tosatto
Silvio C. E. Tosatto University of Padua
Patricia C. Babbitt
Patricia C. Babbitt University of California, San Francisco

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 Molecular Biology, exploring non profit online colleges can be an excellent way to find reputable and flexible degree programs. These institutions offer high-quality education while helping to manage tuition costs, which is a critical consideration for many prospective students.

If you are active military personnel or a veteran, selecting one of the online military friendly colleges ensures you receive necessary support and resources while pursuing your studies remotely. These colleges often provide flexible schedules, tuition assistance, and dedicated advisors to help balance your career, service, and academic goals.

Molecular Biology careers often intersect with other science-related roles in healthcare and research. Programs such as a masters in social work online or accelerated psychology masters programs also offer excellent online learning options for those considering interdisciplinary paths or expanding their expertise in related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Ian Sillitoe

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles