World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
45
Citations
10126
World Ranking
6294
National Ranking
2271

Jeffrey M. Warren 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 Jeffrey M. Warren 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: 163 publications — 48th percentile

48% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jeffrey M. Warren 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 Jeffrey M. Warren 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: 45 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Jeffrey M. Warren is affiliated with Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the United States and specializes in Environmental Science. Their research scope includes subfields such as Global and Planetary Change, Ecology, Plant Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation, and Atmospheric Science.

The scientist's main topics of study cover Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics, Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology, Plant responses to elevated CO2, Tree-ring climate responses, Coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics, Fire effects on ecosystems, and Nuclear Physics and Applications.

Recent notable publications include:

  • Hydraulically-vulnerable trees survive on deep-water access during droughts in a tropical forest, 2021, New Phytologist
  • Rapid Net Carbon Loss From a Whole-Ecosystem Warmed Peatland, 2020, AGU Advances
  • A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata, 2021, Ecological Informatics
  • Optimal stomatal theory predicts CO2 responses of stomatal conductance in both gymnosperm and angiosperm trees, 2022, New Phytologist
  • An Integrative Model for Soil Biogeochemistry and Methane Processes: I. Model Structure and Sensitivity Analysis, 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences

Frequent co-authors include:

  • Paul J. Hanson
  • Bruno Gimenez
  • Jeffrey Q. Chambers
  • Brent D. Newman
  • Robinson Negrón-Juárez

Jeffrey M. Warren has contributed extensively to several publication venues, with the highest number of publications found in OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information). Other frequent venues include New Phytologist, Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences, SSRN Electronic Journal, and Frontiers in Plant Science.

Best Publications

  • CO2 enhancement of forest productivity constrained by limited nitrogen availability

    Richard J Norby;Jeffrey M Warren;Colleen M Iversen;Belinda E Medlyn

  • Optimal stomatal behaviour around the world

    Yan Shih Lin;Belinda E. Medlyn;Remko A. Duursma;I. Colin Prentice;I. Colin Prentice

  • Drivers and Mechanisms of Tree Mortality in Moist Tropical Forests

    Nate G. McDowell;Craig D. Allen;Kristina Anderson‐Teixeira;Kristina Anderson‐Teixeira;Paulo M. Brando

  • Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: a model‐data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites

    Martin G. De Kauwe;Belinda E. Medlyn;Soenke Zaehle;Anthony P. Walker

  • Ecosystem warming extends vegetation activity but heightens vulnerability to cold temperatures

    Andrew D. Richardson;Andrew D. Richardson;Koen Hufkens;Thomas Milliman;Donald M. Aubrecht

  • Using ecosystem experiments to improve vegetation models

    Belinda E Medlyn;Belinda E Medlyn;Sonke Zaehle;Martin G De Kauwe;Anthony P Walker

  • The unseen iceberg: plant roots in arctic tundra

    Colleen M. Iversen;Victoria L. Sloan;Patrick F. Sullivan;Eugenie S. Euskirchen

  • Acclimation and adaptation components of the temperature dependence of plant photosynthesis at the global scale

    Dushan P. Kumarathunge;Belinda E. Medlyn;John E. Drake;Mark G. Tjoelker

  • Root structural and functional dynamics in terrestrial biosphere models – evaluation and recommendations

    Jeffrey M. Warren;Paul J. Hanson;Colleen M. Iversen;Jitendra Kumar

  • Where does the carbon go? A model-data intercomparison of vegetation carbon allocation and turnover processes at two temperate forest free-air CO2 enrichment sites.

    Martin G. De Kauwe;Belinda E. Medlyn;Sönke Zaehle;Anthony P. Walker

  • Maximum height in a conifer is associated with conflicting requirements for xylem design

    Jean-Christophe Domec;Barbara Lachenbruch;Frederick C. Meinzer;David R. Woodruff

  • Native root xylem embolism and stomatal closure in stands of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine: mitigation by hydraulic redistribution.

    J.-C. Domec;J. M. Warren;F. C. Meinzer;J. R. Brooks

  • Vertical stratification of soil water storage and release dynamics in Pacific Northwest coniferous forests

    J. M. Warren;F. C. Meinzer;J. R. Brooks;J. C. Domec

  • Elevated CO2 enhances leaf senescence during extreme drought in a temperate forest

    Jeffrey M. Warren;Richard J. Norby;Stan D. Wullschleger

  • A test of the hydraulic vulnerability segmentation hypothesis in angiosperm and conifer tree species

    Daniel M. Johnson;Remi Wortemann;Katherine A. McCulloh;Lionel Jordan-Meille

  • Dynamics of water transport and storage in conifers studied with deuterium and heat tracing techniques.

    Frederick C. Meinzer;J. R. Brooks;Jean-Christophe Domec;Barbara L. Gartner

  • Global transpiration data from sap flow measurements: the SAPFLUXNET database

    Rafael Poyatos;Víctor Granda;Víctor Flo;Mark A. Adams;Mark A. Adams

  • Attaining whole-ecosystem warming using air and deep-soil heating methods with an elevated CO 2 atmosphere

    Paul J. Hanson;Jeffery S. Riggs;W. Robert Nettles;Jana Randolph Phillips

  • Hydraulic redistribution of water from Pinus ponderosa trees to seedlings: evidence for an ectomycorrhizal pathway

    Jeffrey M. Warren;Jeffrey M. Warren;J. Renée Brooks;Frederick C. Meinzer;Joyce L. Eberhart

  • Impacts of tree height on leaf hydraulic architecture and stomatal control in Douglas-fir

    David R. Woodruff;Katherine A. Mcculloh;Jeffrey M. Warren;Frederick C. Meinzer

  • Converging patterns of uptake and hydraulic redistribution of soil water in contrasting woody vegetation types.

    F. C. Meinzer;J. R. Brooks;S. Bucci;G. Goldstein

Frequent Co-Authors

Richard J. Norby
Richard J. Norby University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Paul J. Hanson
Paul J. Hanson Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Anthony P. Walker
Anthony P. Walker Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Colleen M. Iversen
Colleen M. Iversen Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Stan D. Wullschleger
Stan D. Wullschleger Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Peter E. Thornton
Peter E. Thornton Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Belinda E. Medlyn
Belinda E. Medlyn Western Sydney University
Ram Oren
Ram Oren Duke University
Daniel M. Ricciuto
Daniel M. Ricciuto Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Frederick C. Meinzer
Frederick C. Meinzer Oregon State University

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 broaden career opportunities and skill sets. Many opt for programs listed among the best affordable online general studies degree programs, which allow a flexible and cost-effective education to complement environmental knowledge.

If you’re looking for a smoother transition into this field, some may consider an easy bachelor's degree related to environmental disciplines, available online and designed to help students efficiently complete their studies while gaining valuable skills.

Specialized degrees such as online geology degrees provide an excellent foundation for careers that intersect with Environmental Sciences, focusing on Earth's processes and natural resources.

Additionally, expertise in spatial data is increasingly critical; many students pursue programs recognized among the best GIS schools to develop skills in Geographic Information Systems, essential for environmental monitoring, urban planning, and conservation.

Best Scientists Citing Jeffrey M. Warren

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles