World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
J. William Munger

J. William Munger

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
103
Citations
45235
World Ranking
309
National Ranking
140

J. William Munger 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 J. William Munger 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: 260 publications — 80th percentile

80% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

J. William Munger 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 J. William Munger 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: 103 D-Index — 97th percentile

97% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

J. William Munger is affiliated with Harvard University in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on environmental science, with significant contributions in earth and planetary sciences. Munger's work spans several subfields including global and planetary change, atmospheric science, nature and landscape conservation, ecology, and plant science.

The scientist's research addresses a range of topics within environmental systems, notably plant water relations and carbon dynamics, atmospheric chemistry and aerosols, forest ecology and management, tree-ring climate responses, plant responses to elevated CO2, atmospheric and environmental gas dynamics, and remote sensing in agriculture.

Munger has contributed numerous papers to several publication venues. Some of the recent papers include:

  • Representativeness of Eddy-Covariance flux footprints for areas surrounding AmeriFlux sites (2021), published in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
  • Dry Deposition of Ozone Over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling (2020), published in Reviews of Geophysics
  • Carbon budget of the Harvard Forest Long-Term Ecological Research site: pattern, process, and response to global change (2020), published in Ecological Monographs
  • Previously unaccounted atmospheric mercury deposition in a midlatitude deciduous forest (2021), published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Influence of Dynamic Ozone Dry Deposition on Ozone Pollution (2020), published in Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres

Frequently publishing in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, the scientist has also frequently contributed to the Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, and Geophysical Research Letters.

Collaborations have featured co-authors including Andrew D. Richardson, Ankur R. Desai, Peter D. Blanken, Gil Bohrer, and Ralf M. Staebler.

Best Publications

  • Gap filling strategies for defensible annual sums of net ecosystem exchange

    E. Falge;D. Baldocchi;R. Olson;P. Anthoni

  • Measurements of carbon sequestration by long‐term eddy covariance: methods and a critical evaluation of accuracy

    Michael L. Goulden;J. William Munger;Song-Miao Fan;Bruce C. Daube

  • The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data

    Gilberto Pastorello;Carlo Trotta;Eleonora Canfora;Housen Chu

  • The Amazon basin in transition

    Eric A. Davidson;Alessandro C. de Araújo;Alessandro C. de Araújo;Paulo Artaxo;Jennifer K. Balch;Jennifer K. Balch

  • Increase in forest water-use efficiency as atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rise

    Trevor F. Keenan;David Y. Hollinger;Gil Bohrer;Danilo Dragoni

  • Net Exchange of CO2 in a Mid-Latitude Forest

    S. C. Wofsy;M. L. Goulden;J. W. Munger;S.-M. Fan

  • CO2 balance of boreal, temperate, and tropical forests derived from a global database

    Sebastiaan Luyssaert;Sebastiaan Luyssaert;I. Inglima;M. Jung;A. D. Richardson

  • Sensitivity of boreal forest carbon balance to soil thaw

    M. L. Goulden;S. C. Wofsy;J. W. Harden;Susan E. Trumbore

  • Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity

    Andrew D. Richardson;T. Andy Black;Philippe Ciais;Nicolas Delbart

  • Net carbon uptake has increased through warming-induced changes in temperate forest phenology

    Trevor F. Keenan;Trevor F. Keenan;Josh Gray;Mark A. Friedl;Michael Toomey

  • Exchange of Carbon Dioxide by a Deciduous Forest: Response to Interannual Climate Variability

    Michael L. Goulden;J. William Munger;Song-Miao Fan;Bruce C. Daube

  • Carbon in Amazon Forests: Unexpected Seasonal Fluxes and Disturbance-Induced Losses

    Scott R. Saleska;Scott D. Miller;Daniel M. Matross;Michael L. Goulden

  • Seasonality of ecosystem respiration and gross primary production as derived from FLUXNET measurements

    Eva Falge;Dennis Baldocchi;John Tenhunen;Marc Aubinet

  • Evaluation of remote sensing based terrestrial productivity from MODIS using regional tower eddy flux network observations

    F.A. Heinsch;Maosheng Zhao;S.W. Running;J.S. Kimball

  • Gap filling strategies for long term energy flux data sets

    Eva Falge;Dennis D. Baldocchi;Richard Olson;Peter Anthoni

  • Response of a deciduous forest to the Mount Pinatubo eruption: enhanced photosynthesis.

    Lianhong Gu;Dennis D. Baldocchi;Steve C. Wofsy;J. William Munger

  • Factors controlling long- and short-term sequestration of atmospheric CO2 in a mid-latitude forest.

    Carol C. Barford;Steven C. Wofsy;Michael L. Goulden;J. William Munger

  • Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis

    Andrew D. Richardson;Ryan S. Anderson;M. Altaf Arain;Alan G. Barr

  • Modelling the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in a Quercus-Acer stand at Harvard Forest : the regulation of stomatal conductance by light, nitrogen and soil/plant hydraulic properties

    M. Williams;E. B. Rastetter;D. N. Fernandes;M. L. Goulden;M. L. Goulden

  • Mechanistic scaling of ecosystem function and dynamics in space and time: Ecosystem Demography model version 2

    D. Medvigy;D. Medvigy;S. C. Wofsy;J. W. Munger;D. Y. Hollinger

  • Net Carbon Uptake Has Increased through Warming-Induced Changes in Temperate Forest Phenology

    T. F. Keenan;A. D. Richardson;J. M. Gray;M. A. Friedl

Frequent Co-Authors

Steven C. Wofsy
Steven C. Wofsy Harvard University
Daniel J. Jacob
Daniel J. Jacob Harvard University
David Y. Hollinger
David Y. Hollinger US Forest Service
Andrew D. Richardson
Andrew D. Richardson Northern Arizona University
Michael R. Hoffmann
Michael R. Hoffmann California Institute of Technology
Allen H. Goldstein
Allen H. Goldstein University of California, Berkeley
Michael L. Goulden
Michael L. Goulden University of California, Irvine
Bruce C. Daube
Bruce C. Daube Harvard University
Jiquan Chen
Jiquan Chen Michigan State University
Russell K. Monson
Russell K. Monson University of Colorado Boulder

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

Exploring environmental sciences in the USA opens doors to diverse academic and career opportunities. For those interested in further education, accredited eds to edd programs offer pathways to leadership roles in education and policy development, essential for driving sustainable change.

Students aiming for social work careers connected to community and environmental health might consider dsw programs online. These flexible doctorate options cater to working professionals eager to address social determinants impacting the environment.

For those who want a broad foundation, a cheap online general studies degree can provide the versatility needed to tailor coursework across environmental topics and related disciplines without extensive costs.

Additionally, students looking for simpler entry points may explore easy bachelor degrees online, which can be a strategic starting point before specializing in environmental sciences or complementary fields.

Best Scientists Citing J. William Munger

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles