World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
39
Citations
5349
World Ranking
8414
National Ranking
3002

Justin G. Teeguarden 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 Justin G. Teeguarden 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: 1,094 publications — 100th percentile

100% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Justin G. Teeguarden 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 Justin G. Teeguarden 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: 39 D-Index — 15th percentile

15% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • In-vitro cell exposure studies for the assessment of nanoparticle toxicity in the lung - A dialog between aerosol science and biology

    Hanns-Rudolf Paur;Flemming R. Cassee;Justin Teeguarden;Heinz Fissan

  • Macrophage Responses to Silica Nanoparticles are Highly Conserved Across Particle Sizes

    Katrina M. Waters;Lisa M. Masiello;Richard C. Zangar;Barbara J. Tarasevich

  • Twenty-Four Hour Human Urine and Serum Profiles of Bisphenol A during High-Dietary Exposure

    Justin G. Teeguarden;Antonia M. Calafat;Xiaoyum Ye;Daniel R. Doerge

  • Evaluation of the potential impact of age- and gender-specific pharmacokinetic differences on tissue dosimetry.

    Unknown

  • Evaluation of oral and intravenous route pharmacokinetics, plasma protein binding, and uterine tissue dose metrics of bisphenol A: a physiologically based pharmacokinetic approach.

    Unknown

  • Dysregulation of Macrophage Activation Profiles by Engineered Nanoparticles

    Vamsi Kodali;Matthew H. Littke;Susan C. Tilton;Justin G. Teeguarden

  • Preparation and Characterization Challenges to Understanding Environmental and Biological Impacts of Ceria Nanoparticles

    Ajay S. Karakoti;Prabhakaran Munusamy;Kasey E. Hostetler;Vamsi K. Kodali

  • Transgenerational inheritance of neurobehavioral and physiological deficits from developmental exposure to benzo[a]pyrene in zebrafish.

    Andrea L. Knecht;Lisa Truong;Skylar W. Marvel;David M. Reif

  • Completing the Link between Exposure Science and Toxicology for Improved Environmental Health Decision Making: The Aggregate Exposure Pathway Framework

    Justin G Teeguarden;Yu-Mei Tan;Stephen W Edwards;Jeremy A Leonard

  • Computational modeling of nanoscale and microscale particle deposition, retention and dosimetry in the mouse respiratory tract.

    Unknown

  • Comparative Proteomics and Pulmonary Toxicity of Instilled Single Walled Carbon Nanotubes, Crocidolite Asbestos and Ultrafine Carbon Black in Mice

    Justin G. Teeguarden;Bobbie-Jo Webb-Robertson;Katrina M. Waters;Ashley R. Murray

  • A systematic review of Bisphenol A “low dose” studies in the context of human exposure: A case for establishing standards for reporting “low-dose” effects of chemicals

    Unknown

  • Review and Evaluation of the Potential Impact of Age- and Gender-Specific Pharmacokinetic Differences on Tissue Dosimetry

    Unknown

  • Are typical human serum BPA concentrations measurable and sufficient to be estrogenic in the general population

    Justin Teeguarden;Sesha Hanson-Drury;Jeffrey W. Fisher;Daniel R. Doerge

  • A proposal for assessing study quality: Biomonitoring, Environmental Epidemiology, and Short-lived Chemicals (BEES-C) instrument.

    Judy S. LaKind;Jon R. Sobus;Michael Goodman;Dana Boyd Barr

  • 24-hour human urine and serum profiles of bisphenol A: Evidence against sublingual absorption following ingestion in soup

    Justin G. Teeguarden;Justin G. Teeguarden;Nathan C. Twaddle;Mona I. Churchwell;Xiaoxia Yang

  • Development of a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for assessment of human exposure to bisphenol A

    Xiaoxia Yang;Daniel R. Doerge;Justin G. Teeguarden;Jeffrey W. Fisher

  • Implications of Bioremediation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soils for Human Health and Cancer Risk

    Cleo L. Davie-Martin;Kelly G. Stratton;Justin G. Teeguarden;Katrina M. Waters

  • All that is silver is not toxic: silver ion and particle kinetics reveals the role of silver ion aging and dosimetry on the toxicity of silver nanoparticles.

    Jordan N. Smith;Jordan N. Smith;Dennis G. Thomas;Hadley Jolley;Vamsi K. Kodali

  • Integrating ion mobility spectrometry into mass spectrometry-based exposome measurements: what can it add and how far can it go?

    Thomas O Metz;Erin S Baker;Emma L Schymanski;Ryan S Renslow

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 Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open up diverse career pathways. Many students pursue advanced education to enhance their credentials, such as enrolling in eds to edd bridge programs online, which provide a streamlined path from a master’s to a doctoral degree in education-related fields. This can be especially useful for educators focusing on environmental curriculum development or policy advocacy.

Social work also intersects with environmental issues, particularly regarding community resilience and sustainability. Students looking into the social aspects of environmental challenges might consider the cheapest online dsw programs to gain expertise in helping vulnerable populations adapt to environmental change.

If you want to build a broad foundation useful in multiple sectors, an affordable online general studies degree offers flexibility, allowing students to combine environmental science with complementary disciplines like policy, communication, or business.

For those starting their academic journey, finding the easiest bachelor's degree to get might help balance workload and personal commitments while gaining essential knowledge. This can lay a solid groundwork before specializing in environmental science or related fields.

Recently Published Articles