World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
41
Citations
7092
World Ranking
7669
National Ranking
579

Jim T. Smith 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 Jim T. Smith 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: 282 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: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 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 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 690+

This scientist: 140 publications — 36th percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

Jim T. Smith 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 Jim T. Smith 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: 198 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: 20 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: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

This scientist: 41 D-Index — 22nd percentile

22% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more.

Overview

What is he best known for?

The fields of study he is best known for:

  • Ecology
  • Statistics
  • Ecosystem

His primary areas of investigation include Hydrology, Environmental chemistry, Drainage basin, Chernobyl Nuclear Accident and Surface water. Hydrology connects with themes related to Eutrophication in his study. His Eutrophication research incorporates themes from Water quality, Streamflow and Hydrology.

His work deals with themes such as Soil science, Water column and Nuclear weapons testing, which intersect with Environmental chemistry. In his research on the topic of Drainage basin, Radioactive waste, Environmental monitoring and Strontium-90 is strongly related with Watershed. His Wildlife research focuses on Population density and how it relates to Ecology.

His most cited work include:

  • Handbook of Parameter Values for the Prediction of Radionuclide Transfer in Terrestrial and Freshwater Environments (316 citations)
  • Modelling of phosphorus inputs to rivers from diffuse and point sources. (122 citations)
  • Chernobyl: Catastrophe and Consequences (109 citations)

What are the main themes of his work throughout his whole career to date?

Jim T. Smith mostly deals with Hydrology, Environmental chemistry, Ecology, Surface water and Water pollution. His Hydrology research integrates issues from Soil water and Deposition. The study incorporates disciplines such as Contamination, Eutrophication and Activity concentration in addition to Environmental chemistry.

His research is interdisciplinary, bridging the disciplines of Watershed and Surface water. His work on Water pollution is being expanded to include thematically relevant topics such as Radioactive contamination. The Hydrology study which covers Streamflow that intersects with Water quality.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Hydrology (27.21%)
  • Environmental chemistry (14.29%)
  • Ecology (10.88%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2017-2021)?

  • Zoology (2.72%)
  • Chronic radiation syndrome (3.40%)
  • Exclusion zone (3.40%)

In recent papers he was focusing on the following fields of study:

Jim T. Smith spends much of his time researching Zoology, Chronic radiation syndrome, Exclusion zone, Wildlife and Environmental ethics. Jim T. Smith has included themes like Reproductive system and Perch in his Zoology study. His biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Development of the gonads and Gonad.

Exclusion zone is integrated with Metallurgy, Radiography, Surface water, Parametric statistics and Drainage basin in his study. The various areas that Jim T. Smith examines in his Wildlife study include Statistics and Low dose. His Crustacean study integrates concerns from other disciplines, such as Biota, Invertebrate and Radioactive contamination.

Between 2017 and 2021, his most popular works were:

  • Impact of Environmental Radiation on the Health and Reproductive Status of Fish from Chernobyl (19 citations)
  • Towards solving a scientific controversy - The effects of ionising radiation on the environment. (16 citations)
  • Reproduction in the freshwater crustacean Asellus aquaticus along a gradient of radionuclide contamination at Chernobyl. (14 citations)

In his most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Ecology
  • Statistics
  • Ecosystem

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Zoology, Chronic radiation syndrome, Wildlife, Biota and Crustacean. His Zoology research incorporates elements of Chronic exposure, Acute exposure, Relative species abundance, Rutilus and Reproductive system. His Wildlife research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Statistics, Radiation monitoring and Low dose.

The Biota study combines topics in areas such as Bioconcentration, Mutation rate, Genetic diversity and Geographical distance. His research integrates issues of Invertebrate, Radioecology, Radioactive contamination and Reproduction in his study of Crustacean. His studies in Fecundity integrate themes in fields like Andrology and Fertility.

Best Publications

  • Handbook of Parameter Values for the Prediction of Radionuclide Transfer in Terrestrial and Freshwater Environments

    M. Balonov;C.L. Barnett;M. Belli;N.A. Beresford

  • Environment, Development, and Sustainability

    Joanna Chataway;Peter Robbins;James Smith

  • Chernobyl: Catastrophe and Consequences

    Jim T. Smith;Nicholas A. Beresford

  • Thirty years after the Chernobyl accident: What lessons have we learnt?

    N.A. Beresford;S. Fesenko;A. Konoplev;L. Skuterud

  • Modelling of phosphorus inputs to rivers from diffuse and point sources.

    Michael J. Bowes;Jim T. Smith;Helen P. Jarvie;Colin Neal

  • Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl

    T.G. Deryabina;S.V. Kuchmel;L.L. Nagorskaya;T.G. Hinton

  • Chernobyl's legacy in food and water

    J. T. Smith;R. N. J. Comans;N. A. Beresford;S. M. Wright

  • Quantification of Radionuclide Transfer in Terrestrialand Freshwater Environments for Radiological Assessments.IAEA-TECDOC-1616

    C.L. Barnett;M. Belli;N.A. Beresford;P. Bossew

  • The value of high-resolution nutrient monitoring: A case study of the River Frome, Dorset, UK

    Michael J. Bowes;Jim T. Smith;Colin Neal

  • Modelling the diffusive transport and remobilisation of 137Cs in sediments: The effects of sorption kinetics and reversibility

    J.T. Smith;R.N.J. Comans

  • Colonisation of freshwater habitats by the European eel Anguilla anguilla

    Anton Ibbotson;Jim Smith;Peter Scarlett;Miran Aprhamian

  • Superior anti-corrosion and self-healing bi-functional polymer composite coatings with polydopamine modified mesoporous silica/graphene oxide

    Yanqi Ma;Haowei Huang;Haowei Huang;Hongda Zhou;Michael Graham

  • Temporal Change in Fallout 137Cs in Terrestrial and Aquatic Systems: A Whole Ecosystem Approach

    James T. Smith;Serguei V. Fesenko;Brenda J. Howard;A. David Horrill

  • Negative control of Xenopus GATA-2 by activin and noggin with eventual expression in precursors of the ventral blood islands.

    Maggie E. Walmsley;Matthew J. Guille;David Bertwistle;James Thompson Smith

  • Global Analysis of the Riverine Transport of 90Sr and 137Cs

    Jim T. Smith;Simon M. Wright;Matthew A. Cross;Luigi Monte

  • Radiocaesium concentration factors of Chernobyl-contaminated fish: a study of the influence of potassium, and “blind” testing of a previously developed model

    James T Smith;Anatoly V Kudelsky;Igor N Ryabov;Rolf H Hadderingh

  • Uptake and elimination of radiocaesium in fish and the “size effect”

    J T Smith;A V Kudelsky;I N Ryabov;S E a Daire

  • Changes in water quality of the River Frome (UK) from 1965 to 2009: Is phosphorus mitigation finally working?

    M. J. Bowes;Jim T. Smith;C. Neal;D. V. Leach

  • Low dose ionizing radiation produces too few reactive oxygen species to directly affect antioxidant concentrations in cells

    J. T.. Smith;Neil. Willey;John T.. Hancock

  • Predicting the radiation exposure of terrestrial wildlife in the Chernobyl exclusion zone: an international comparison of approaches

    Nick Beresford;Catherine L. Barnett;J.E Brown;J-J. Cheng

  • Environmental consequences of the Chernobyl accident and their remediation: Twenty years of experience. Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert group “Environment”

    R. Alexakhin;L. Anspaugh;M. Balonov;B. Batandjieva

Frequent Co-Authors

Nicholas A. Beresford
Nicholas A. Beresford University of Salford
Brenda J. Howard
Brenda J. Howard University of Nottingham
Michael J. Bowes
Michael J. Bowes Natural Environment Research Council
John E. Brittain
John E. Brittain University of Oslo
Rob N.J. Comans
Rob N.J. Comans Wageningen University & Research
David Copplestone
David Copplestone University of Stirling
Justin Brown
Justin Brown Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority
Colin Neal
Colin Neal Ford Motor Company (United States)
Peter Bossew
Peter Bossew Federal Office for Radiation Protection
Francis R. Livens
Francis R. Livens University of Manchester

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 those interested in expanding their expertise beyond Environmental Sciences, related fields such as sociology offer valuable insights into human-environment interactions. Prospective students might consider pursuing an online bachelors in sociology to better understand societal impacts on ecological systems and promote sustainable development.

Advanced professionals looking to deepen their knowledge without the heavy commitment of traditional research can explore flexible options like an doctorate degree online no dissertation. These programs suit working individuals aiming to enhance leadership and policy-making skills relevant to environmental and social sectors.

Transitioning from a master's level degree to a doctorate is streamlined through convenient pathways such as eds to edd programs online. This approach supports educators and administrators focused on environmental education and sustainability initiatives.

For professionals focused on community welfare and support systems, pursuing one of the online dsw programs provides advanced clinical and leadership training. Such credentials are increasingly important in addressing environmental justice and public health challenges.

Best Scientists Citing Jim T. Smith

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles