World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Ecology and Evolution

D-Index
57
Citations
12002
World Ranking
2709
National Ranking
965

James A. Lutz publication distribution in Ecology and Evolution in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Ecology and Evolution in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where James A. Lutz sits on this spectrum.

37–41 publications: 2 scientists 42–46 publications: 9 scientists 47–51 publications: 10 scientists 52–56 publications: 31 scientists 57–61 publications: 56 scientists 62–66 publications: 91 scientists 67–71 publications: 92 scientists 72–76 publications: 127 scientists 77–81 publications: 173 scientists 82–86 publications: 236 scientists 87–91 publications: 227 scientists 92–96 publications: 240 scientists 97–101 publications: 333 scientists 102–106 publications: 280 scientists 107–111 publications: 300 scientists 112–116 publications: 285 scientists 117–121 publications: 305 scientists 122–126 publications: 287 scientists 127–131 publications: 278 scientists 132–136 publications: 289 scientists 137–141 publications: 273 scientists 142–146 publications: 262 scientists 147–151 publications: 246 scientists 152–156 publications: 235 scientists 157–161 publications: 205 scientists 162–166 publications: 199 scientists 167–171 publications: 174 scientists 172–176 publications: 164 scientists 177–181 publications: 173 scientists 182–186 publications: 189 scientists 187–191 publications: 170 scientists 192–196 publications: 139 scientists 197–201 publications: 128 scientists 202–206 publications: 117 scientists 207–211 publications: 115 scientists 212–216 publications: 107 scientists 217–221 publications: 124 scientists 222–226 publications: 81 scientists 227–231 publications: 82 scientists 232–236 publications: 85 scientists 237–241 publications: 75 scientists 242–246 publications: 66 scientists 247–251 publications: 81 scientists 252–256 publications: 69 scientists 257–261 publications: 70 scientists 262–266 publications: 55 scientists 267–271 publications: 64 scientists 272–276 publications: 49 scientists 277–281 publications: 48 scientists 282–286 publications: 44 scientists 287–291 publications: 45 scientists 292–296 publications: 36 scientists 297–301 publications: 39 scientists 302–306 publications: 38 scientists 307–311 publications: 30 scientists 312–316 publications: 34 scientists 317–321 publications: 25 scientists 322–326 publications: 22 scientists 327–331 publications: 28 scientists 332–336 publications: 30 scientists 337–341 publications: 22 scientists 342–346 publications: 30 scientists 347–351 publications: 26 scientists 352–356 publications: 22 scientists 357–361 publications: 29 scientists 362–366 publications: 21 scientists 367–371 publications: 12 scientists 372–376 publications: 18 scientists 377–381 publications: 17 scientists 382–386 publications: 13 scientists 387–391 publications: 21 scientists 392–396 publications: 13 scientists 397–401 publications: 10 scientists 402–406 publications: 15 scientists 407–411 publications: 8 scientists 412–416 publications: 9 scientists 417–421 publications: 8 scientists 422–426 publications: 4 scientists 427–431 publications: 10 scientists 432–436 publications: 10 scientists 437–441 publications: 5 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 10 scientists 452–456 publications: 2 scientists 457–461 publications: 4 scientists 462–466 publications: 7 scientists 467–471 publications: 7 scientists 472–476 publications: 6 scientists 477–481 publications: 6 scientists 482–486 publications: 3 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 4 scientists 497–501 publications: 4 scientists 502–506 publications: 8 scientists 507–511 publications: 5 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 5 scientists 522–526 publications: 4 scientists 527–530 publications: 5 scientists 531+ publications: 100 scientists
37 publications 531+

This scientist: 178 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 531 publications or more.

James A. Lutz D-index placement in Ecology and Evolution in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Ecology and Evolution scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where James A. Lutz sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 95 scientists 31 D-Index: 123 scientists 32 D-Index: 191 scientists 33 D-Index: 245 scientists 34 D-Index: 252 scientists 35 D-Index: 244 scientists 36 D-Index: 249 scientists 37 D-Index: 244 scientists 38 D-Index: 254 scientists 39 D-Index: 254 scientists 40 D-Index: 280 scientists 41 D-Index: 274 scientists 42 D-Index: 266 scientists 43 D-Index: 233 scientists 44 D-Index: 248 scientists 45 D-Index: 208 scientists 46 D-Index: 201 scientists 47 D-Index: 213 scientists 48 D-Index: 207 scientists 49 D-Index: 172 scientists 50 D-Index: 209 scientists 51 D-Index: 199 scientists 52 D-Index: 153 scientists 53 D-Index: 169 scientists 54 D-Index: 163 scientists 55 D-Index: 148 scientists 56 D-Index: 120 scientists 57 D-Index: 146 scientists 58 D-Index: 137 scientists 59 D-Index: 140 scientists 60 D-Index: 104 scientists 61 D-Index: 119 scientists 62 D-Index: 118 scientists 63 D-Index: 99 scientists 64 D-Index: 77 scientists 65 D-Index: 100 scientists 66 D-Index: 86 scientists 67 D-Index: 83 scientists 68 D-Index: 75 scientists 69 D-Index: 94 scientists 70 D-Index: 57 scientists 71 D-Index: 68 scientists 72 D-Index: 59 scientists 73 D-Index: 63 scientists 74 D-Index: 66 scientists 75 D-Index: 60 scientists 76 D-Index: 42 scientists 77 D-Index: 49 scientists 78 D-Index: 39 scientists 79 D-Index: 37 scientists 80 D-Index: 43 scientists 81 D-Index: 41 scientists 82 D-Index: 45 scientists 83 D-Index: 34 scientists 84 D-Index: 40 scientists 85 D-Index: 35 scientists 86 D-Index: 55 scientists 87 D-Index: 24 scientists 88 D-Index: 24 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 23 scientists 91 D-Index: 25 scientists 92 D-Index: 27 scientists 93 D-Index: 27 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 23 scientists 96 D-Index: 12 scientists 97 D-Index: 14 scientists 98 D-Index: 19 scientists 99 D-Index: 16 scientists 100 D-Index: 14 scientists 101 D-Index: 5 scientists 102 D-Index: 21 scientists 103 D-Index: 16 scientists 104 D-Index: 10 scientists 105 D-Index: 7 scientists 106 D-Index: 7 scientists 107 D-Index: 7 scientists 108 D-Index: 6 scientists 109 D-Index: 9 scientists 110 D-Index: 11 scientists 111 D-Index: 12 scientists 112 D-Index: 9 scientists 113 D-Index: 7 scientists 114 D-Index: 3 scientists 115 D-Index: 8 scientists 116 D-Index: 5 scientists 117 D-Index: 11 scientists 118 D-Index: 4 scientists 119 D-Index: 2 scientists 120 D-Index: 5 scientists 121+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 121+

This scientist: 57 D-Index — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 121 D-Index or more.

Overview

James A. Lutz is affiliated with Utah State University in the United States. The scientist's research primarily focuses on Environmental Science, with a significant emphasis on subfields such as Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Ecology, Plant Science, and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics.

Their body of work encompasses a wide range of topics, including:

  • Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Forest ecology and management
  • Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Plant and animal studies
  • Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies

James A. Lutz has published in various scientific venues, with frequent contributions to:

  • Forest Ecology and Management
  • Ecological Processes
  • Nature Communications
  • Ecosphere
  • Fire Ecology

Some of their recent publications include:

  • "ForestGEO: Understanding forest diversity and dynamics through a global observatory network," 2020, Biological Conservation
  • "Joint effects of climate, tree size, and year on annual tree growth derived from tree-ring records of ten globally distributed forests," 2021, Global Change Biology
  • "Continent-wide tree fecundity driven by indirect climate effects," 2021, Nature Communications
  • "Is there tree senescence? The fecundity evidence," 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • "Previous wildfires and management treatments moderate subsequent fire severity," 2021, Forest Ecology and Management

Among the frequent collaborators in their research are:

  • Gregory S. Gilbert
  • Andrew J. Larson
  • Kristina J. Anderson-Teixeira
  • Jonathan A. Myers
  • María Uriarte

Best Publications

  • 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

  • Global importance of large‐diameter trees

    James A. Lutz;Tucker J. Furniss;Daniel J. Johnson;Stuart J. Davies

  • Restoring forest resilience: From reference spatial patterns to silvicultural prescriptions and monitoring

    Derek J. Churchill;Andrew J. Larson;Matthew C. Dahlgreen;Jerry F. Franklin

  • Forest ecosystems, disturbance, and climatic change in Washington State, USA

    Jeremy S. Littell;Elaine E. Oneil;Donald McKenzie;Jeffrey A. Hicke

  • Scale-dependent relationships between tree species richness and ecosystem function in forests

    Ryan A. Chisholm;Helene C. Muller-Landau;Kassim Abdul Rahman;Daniel P. Bebber

  • Climatic water deficit, tree species ranges, and climate change in Yosemite National Park

    James A. Lutz;Jan W. van Wagtendonk;Jerry F. Franklin

  • Lower forest density enhances snow retention in regions with warmer winters: A global framework developed from plot-scale observations and modeling

    Jessica D. Lundquist;Susan E. Dickerson-Lange;James A. Lutz;Nicoleta C. Cristea

  • Plant diversity increases with the strength of negative density dependence at the global scale.

    Joseph A. LaManna;Scott A. Mangan;Alfonso Alonso;Norman A. Bourg;Norman A. Bourg

  • Ecological importance of large-diameter trees in a temperate mixed-conifer forest.

    James A. Lutz;Andrew J. Larson;Mark E. Swanson;James A. Freund

  • TREE MORTALITY DURING EARLY FOREST DEVELOPMENT: A LONG-TERM STUDY OF RATES, CAUSES, AND CONSEQUENCES

    James A. Lutz;Charles B. Halpern

  • The Science of Firescapes: Achieving Fire-Resilient Communities.

    Alistair M. S. Smith;Crystal A. Kolden;Travis B. Paveglio;Mark A. Cochrane

  • ForestGEO: Understanding forest diversity and dynamics through a global observatory network

    Stuart J. Davies;Iveren Abiem;Kamariah Abu Salim;Salomón Aguilar

  • Comparisons between field- and LiDAR-based measures of stand structural complexity

    Van R. KaneV.R. Kane;Van R. KaneV.R. Kane;Robert J. McGaugheyR.J. McGaughey;Robert J. McGaugheyR.J. McGaughey;Jonathan D. BakkerJ.D. Bakker;Jonathan D. BakkerJ.D. Bakker;Rolf F. GersondeR.F. Gersonde;Rolf F. GersondeR.F. Gersonde

  • Mapped versus actual burned area within wildfire perimeters: Characterizing the unburned

    Crystal A. Kolden;James A. Lutz;Carl H. Key;Jonathan T. Kane

  • Fire Refugia: What Are They, and Why Do They Matter for Global Change?

    Arjan J H Meddens;Crystal A Kolden;James A Lutz;Alistair M S Smith

  • Water balance and topography predict fire and forest structure patterns

    Van R. Kane;James A. Lutz;C. Alina Cansler;Nicholas A. Povak

  • Mixed severity fire effects within the Rim fire: Relative importance of local climate, fire weather, topography, and forest structure

    Van R. Kane;C. Alina Cansler;Nicholas A. Povak;Jonathan T. Kane

  • The importance of large-diameter trees to forest structural heterogeneity.

    James A. Lutz;Andrew J. Larson;James A. Freund;Mark E. Swanson

  • Local spatial structure of forest biomass and its consequences for remote sensing of carbon stocks

    M. Réjou-Méchain;Helene C. Muller-Landau;Matteo Detto;S. C. Thomas

  • Canopy closure exerts weak controls on understory dynamics: a 30-year study of overstory–understory interactions

    Charles B. Halpern;James A. Lutz

  • Landscape-scale effects of fire severity on mixed-conifer and red fir forest structure in Yosemite National Park

    Van R. Kane;James A. Lutz;Susan L. Roberts;Douglas F. Smith

Frequent Co-Authors

Andrew J. Larson
Andrew J. Larson University of Montana
Jerry F. Franklin
Jerry F. Franklin University of Washington
David Kenfack
David Kenfack Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Stuart J. Davies
Stuart J. Davies Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Crystal A. Kolden
Crystal A. Kolden University of California, Merced
Stephen P. Hubbell
Stephen P. Hubbell University of California, Los Angeles
Sean M. McMahon
Sean M. McMahon Smithsonian Environmental Research Center
Kristina J. Anderson-Teixeira
Kristina J. Anderson-Teixeira Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute
Fangliang He
Fangliang He University of Alberta
Jonathan Myers
Jonathan Myers VA Palo Alto Health Care System

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 Ecology and Evolution can open doors to diverse career opportunities in research, conservation, environmental consulting, and more. Many students are now exploring flexible pathways through online degrees to help balance their studies with work or other responsibilities.

For those interested in merging science with healthcare, there are accelerated options such as the shortest rn to bsn program or various bridge programs that allow registered nurses to advance quickly. Professionals who aspire to become nurse practitioners may consider rn to np programs online to reach higher qualifications efficiently.

Non-nurses with a bachelor’s degree in a different field can also find opportunities through online direct entry msn programs, which provide a path into advanced healthcare roles without a prior nursing background.

With the growing number of online degree providers, it’s important to compare program quality, flexibility, and outcomes. For example, students often weigh options like capella vs chamberlain rn to bsn to find the best fit for their needs.

Best Scientists Citing James A. Lutz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles