World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Biology and Biochemistry

D-Index
76
Citations
14430
World Ranking
5172
National Ranking
2459

Jonathan D. Cooper publication distribution in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Biology and Biochemistry in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jonathan D. Cooper sits on this spectrum.

47–56 publications: 8 scientists 57–66 publications: 35 scientists 67–76 publications: 106 scientists 77–86 publications: 231 scientists 87–96 publications: 413 scientists 97–106 publications: 546 scientists 107–116 publications: 704 scientists 117–126 publications: 848 scientists 127–136 publications: 980 scientists 137–146 publications: 942 scientists 147–156 publications: 969 scientists 157–166 publications: 949 scientists 167–176 publications: 951 scientists 177–186 publications: 915 scientists 187–196 publications: 787 scientists 197–206 publications: 840 scientists 207–216 publications: 733 scientists 217–226 publications: 708 scientists 227–236 publications: 651 scientists 237–246 publications: 605 scientists 247–256 publications: 510 scientists 257–266 publications: 524 scientists 267–276 publications: 434 scientists 277–286 publications: 417 scientists 287–296 publications: 350 scientists 297–306 publications: 363 scientists 307–316 publications: 315 scientists 317–326 publications: 296 scientists 327–336 publications: 261 scientists 337–346 publications: 240 scientists 347–356 publications: 219 scientists 357–366 publications: 196 scientists 367–376 publications: 154 scientists 377–386 publications: 161 scientists 387–396 publications: 155 scientists 397–406 publications: 145 scientists 407–416 publications: 124 scientists 417–426 publications: 112 scientists 427–436 publications: 132 scientists 437–446 publications: 116 scientists 447–456 publications: 99 scientists 457–466 publications: 81 scientists 467–476 publications: 91 scientists 477–486 publications: 80 scientists 487–496 publications: 80 scientists 497–506 publications: 59 scientists 507–516 publications: 36 scientists 517–526 publications: 46 scientists 527–536 publications: 54 scientists 537–546 publications: 44 scientists 547–556 publications: 43 scientists 557–566 publications: 43 scientists 567–576 publications: 42 scientists 577–586 publications: 25 scientists 587–596 publications: 34 scientists 597–606 publications: 23 scientists 607–616 publications: 33 scientists 617–626 publications: 31 scientists 627–636 publications: 27 scientists 637–646 publications: 25 scientists 647–656 publications: 28 scientists 657–666 publications: 34 scientists 667–676 publications: 18 scientists 677–686 publications: 16 scientists 687–696 publications: 10 scientists 697–706 publications: 12 scientists 707–716 publications: 21 scientists 717–726 publications: 12 scientists 727–736 publications: 12 scientists 737–746 publications: 10 scientists 747–756 publications: 7 scientists 757–766 publications: 13 scientists 767–776 publications: 15 scientists 777–786 publications: 13 scientists 787–796 publications: 9 scientists 797–806 publications: 9 scientists 807–816 publications: 7 scientists 817–826 publications: 4 scientists 827–836 publications: 9 scientists 837–846 publications: 7 scientists 847–856 publications: 3 scientists 857–866 publications: 5 scientists 867–876 publications: 5 scientists 877–886 publications: 11 scientists 887–896 publications: 3 scientists 897–906 publications: 4 scientists 907–916 publications: 7 scientists 917–926 publications: 5 scientists 927–936 publications: 6 scientists 937–946 publications: 6 scientists 947–956 publications: 3 scientists 957–966 publications: 7 scientists 967–976 publications: 2 scientists 977–986 publications: 2 scientists 987–996 publications: 1 scientists 997–1,006 publications: 5 scientists 1,007–1,016 publications: 2 scientists 1,017–1,026 publications: 2 scientists 1,027 publications: 1 scientists 1,028+ publications: 100 scientists
47 publications 1,028+

This scientist: 243 publications — 65th percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,028 publications or more.

Jonathan D. Cooper D-index placement in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

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

40–41 D-Index: 80 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 183 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 316 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 504 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 718 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 899 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 1,025 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 1,149 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 1,235 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 1,253 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 1,162 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 1,130 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 1,031 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 897 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 814 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 714 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 709 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 596 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 512 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 473 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 412 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 373 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 358 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 285 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 273 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 227 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 208 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 193 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 153 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 157 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 148 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 120 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 113 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 100 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 86 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 67 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 71 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 73 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 64 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 53 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 60 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 54 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 43 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 38 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 49 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 26 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 18 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 23 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 32 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 32 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 27 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 19 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 22 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 12 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 16 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 14 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 10 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 13 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 10 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 7 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 9 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 13 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 4 scientists 166 D-Index: 4 scientists 167+ D-Index: 98 scientists
40 D-Index 167+

This scientist: 76 D-Index — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 167 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • mTORC1-independent TFEB activation via Akt inhibition promotes cellular clearance in neurodegenerative storage diseases

    Michela Palmieri;Rituraj Pal;Hemanth R. Nelvagal;Parisa Lotfi

  • Failed retrograde transport of NGF in a mouse model of Down's syndrome: reversal of cholinergic neurodegenerative phenotypes following NGF infusion.

    Jonathan D. Cooper;Ahmad Salehi;Jean-Dominique Delcroix;Charles L. Howe

  • Afferent and efferent connections of the laterodorsal tegmental nucleus in the rat.

    J. Cornwall;J.D. Cooper;O.T. Phillipson

  • Inactivation of bcl-2 Results in Progressive Degeneration of Motoneurons, Sympathetic and Sensory Neurons during Early Postnatal Development

    T.M Michaelidis;M Sendtner;J.D Cooper;M.S Airaksinen

  • Overexpression of human wild-type FUS causes progressive motor neuron degeneration in an age- and dose-dependent fashion

    Jacqueline C. Mitchell;Philip McGoldrick;Caroline Vance;Tibor Hortobagyi

  • Correction: Corrigendum: mTORC1-independent TFEB activation via Akt inhibition promotes cellular clearance in neurodegenerative storage diseases

    Michela Palmieri;Rituraj Pal;Hemanth R. Nelvagal;Parisa Lotfi

  • Absence of p75NTR causes increased basal forebrain cholinergic neuron size, choline acetyltransferase activity, and target innervation.

    Tracy T. Yeo;Jane Chua-Couzens;Larry L. Butcher;Dale E. Bredesen

  • Cholinergic regulation of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and nerve growth factor (NGF) but not neurotrophin-3 (NT-3) mRNA levels in the developing rat hippocampus

    M da Penha Berzaghi;J Cooper;E Castren;F Zafra

  • Targeted Disruption of the Cln3 Gene Provides a Mouse Model for Batten Disease

    Hannah M. Mitchison;David J. Bernard;Nicholas D.E. Greene;Jonathan D. Cooper

  • The relative abundance of birds on set-aside and neighbouring fields in summer

    Ian G. Henderson;Jonathan Cooper;Robert J. Fuller;Juliet Vickery

  • Regional and cellular neuropathology in the palmitoyl protein thioesterase-1 null mutant mouse model of infantile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis

    Ellen Bible;Praveena Gupta;Sandra L. Hofmann;Jonathan D. Cooper

  • Successive neuron loss in the thalamus and cortex in a mouse model of infantile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis

    Catherine Kielar;Lucy Maddox;Ellen Bible;Charlie C Pontikis

  • Neuropathology in Mouse Models of Mucopolysaccharidosis Type I, IIIA and IIIB

    Fiona L. Wilkinson;Rebecca J. Holley;Kia J. Langford-Smith;Soumya Badrinath

  • Late onset neurodegeneration in the Cln3 -/- mouse model of juvenile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis is preceded by low level glial activation

    Charlie C. Pontikis;Claire V. Cella;Nisha Parihar;Ming J. Lim

  • Atrophy but not death of adult septal cholinergic neurons after ablation of target capacity to produce mRNAs for NGF, BDNF, and NT3

    M. V. Sofroniew;Jonathan Cooper;C. N. Svendsen;P. Crossman

  • Intraventricular enzyme replacement improves disease phenotypes in a mouse model of late infantile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis

    Michael Chang;Jonathan D Cooper;David E Sleat;David E Sleat;Seng H Cheng

  • High resolution 1H NMR-based metabolomics indicates a neurotransmitter cycling deficit in cerebral tissue from a mouse model of Batten disease.

    Michael R. Pears;Jonathan D. Cooper;Hannah M. Mitchison;Russell J. Mortishire-Smith

  • Projections to the rostral reticular thalamic nucleus in the rat.

    J. Cornwall;J. D. Cooper;O. T. Phillipson

  • Clinical challenges and future therapeutic approaches for neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis.

    Sara E Mole;Glenn Anderson;Heather A Band;Samuel F Berkovic

  • Targeted disruption of the Cln3 gene provides a mouse model for Batten disease (vol 6, pg 321, 1999)

    HM Mitchison;DJ Bernard;Nde Greene;JD Cooper

Frequent Co-Authors

Andrew Wong
Andrew Wong University College London
David Pearce
David Pearce Northumbria University
Mark S. Sands
Mark S. Sands Washington University in St. Louis
Simon N. Waddington
Simon N. Waddington University College London
William C. Mobley
William C. Mobley University of California, San Diego
Hannah M. Mitchison
Hannah M. Mitchison University College London
Anu Jalanko
Anu Jalanko University of Helsinki
Christopher C. J. Miller
Christopher C. J. Miller King's College London
Michael V. Sofroniew
Michael V. Sofroniew University of California, Los Angeles
Sara E. Mole
Sara E. Mole University College London

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

Studying Biology and Biochemistry opens doors to diverse careers in healthcare, research, and applied sciences. Many students are now exploring online programs that offer both flexibility and affordability, making it easier to start or advance in these fields from anywhere.

If you're interested in nutrition and want to support health and wellness, consider enrolling in the cheapest online nutrition degree options available. For those interested in imaging and diagnostics, becoming an ultrasound technologist is a great choice—look for an accredited online ultrasound tech school to get started.

Radiology is another growing field that values professionals with strong science backgrounds. If cost is a concern, you can pursue one of the cheapest radiology tech programs online to earn your qualifications efficiently. For those seeking advanced credentials, the top dietetics programs in the US are highly respected and can lead to specialized roles in clinical nutrition, food science, and public health.

Exploring these related online degrees can expand your career opportunities for a rewarding future in the life sciences.

Best Scientists Citing Jonathan D. Cooper

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles