World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Plant Science and Agronomy

D-Index
55
Citations
10300
World Ranking
1625
National Ranking
435

Kenneth A. Shackel publication distribution in Plant Science and Agronomy in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Plant Science and Agronomy in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Kenneth A. Shackel sits on this spectrum.

36–40 publications: 2 scientists 41–45 publications: 7 scientists 46–50 publications: 40 scientists 51–55 publications: 58 scientists 56–60 publications: 60 scientists 61–65 publications: 107 scientists 66–70 publications: 130 scientists 71–75 publications: 153 scientists 76–80 publications: 191 scientists 81–85 publications: 199 scientists 86–90 publications: 206 scientists 91–95 publications: 218 scientists 96–100 publications: 226 scientists 101–105 publications: 227 scientists 106–110 publications: 247 scientists 111–115 publications: 255 scientists 116–120 publications: 253 scientists 121–125 publications: 233 scientists 126–130 publications: 219 scientists 131–135 publications: 201 scientists 136–140 publications: 194 scientists 141–145 publications: 176 scientists 146–150 publications: 157 scientists 151–155 publications: 147 scientists 156–160 publications: 151 scientists 161–165 publications: 159 scientists 166–170 publications: 137 scientists 171–175 publications: 128 scientists 176–180 publications: 126 scientists 181–185 publications: 98 scientists 186–190 publications: 114 scientists 191–195 publications: 100 scientists 196–200 publications: 90 scientists 201–205 publications: 71 scientists 206–210 publications: 98 scientists 211–215 publications: 70 scientists 216–220 publications: 86 scientists 221–225 publications: 61 scientists 226–230 publications: 58 scientists 231–235 publications: 53 scientists 236–240 publications: 64 scientists 241–245 publications: 39 scientists 246–250 publications: 46 scientists 251–255 publications: 51 scientists 256–260 publications: 36 scientists 261–265 publications: 44 scientists 266–270 publications: 35 scientists 271–275 publications: 30 scientists 276–280 publications: 33 scientists 281–285 publications: 35 scientists 286–290 publications: 36 scientists 291–295 publications: 26 scientists 296–300 publications: 26 scientists 301–305 publications: 31 scientists 306–310 publications: 30 scientists 311–315 publications: 21 scientists 316–320 publications: 29 scientists 321–325 publications: 14 scientists 326–330 publications: 15 scientists 331–335 publications: 15 scientists 336–340 publications: 17 scientists 341–345 publications: 15 scientists 346–350 publications: 12 scientists 351–355 publications: 17 scientists 356–360 publications: 18 scientists 361–365 publications: 12 scientists 366–370 publications: 11 scientists 371–375 publications: 6 scientists 376–380 publications: 6 scientists 381–385 publications: 11 scientists 386–390 publications: 9 scientists 391–395 publications: 10 scientists 396–400 publications: 8 scientists 401–405 publications: 4 scientists 406–410 publications: 9 scientists 411–415 publications: 11 scientists 416–420 publications: 4 scientists 421–425 publications: 7 scientists 426–430 publications: 4 scientists 431–435 publications: 3 scientists 436–440 publications: 5 scientists 441–445 publications: 8 scientists 446–450 publications: 6 scientists 451–455 publications: 7 scientists 456–460 publications: 5 scientists 461–465 publications: 6 scientists 466 publications: 2 scientists 467+ publications: 99 scientists
36 publications 467+

This scientist: 161 publications — 63rd percentile

63% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 467 publications or more.

Kenneth A. Shackel D-index placement in Plant Science and Agronomy in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Plant Science and Agronomy scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Kenneth A. Shackel sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 200 scientists 31 D-Index: 236 scientists 32 D-Index: 253 scientists 33 D-Index: 283 scientists 34 D-Index: 288 scientists 35 D-Index: 240 scientists 36 D-Index: 246 scientists 37 D-Index: 243 scientists 38 D-Index: 247 scientists 39 D-Index: 229 scientists 40 D-Index: 232 scientists 41 D-Index: 230 scientists 42 D-Index: 228 scientists 43 D-Index: 219 scientists 44 D-Index: 193 scientists 45 D-Index: 164 scientists 46 D-Index: 158 scientists 47 D-Index: 143 scientists 48 D-Index: 131 scientists 49 D-Index: 127 scientists 50 D-Index: 122 scientists 51 D-Index: 122 scientists 52 D-Index: 110 scientists 53 D-Index: 102 scientists 54 D-Index: 98 scientists 55 D-Index: 79 scientists 56 D-Index: 85 scientists 57 D-Index: 88 scientists 58 D-Index: 91 scientists 59 D-Index: 62 scientists 60 D-Index: 61 scientists 61 D-Index: 59 scientists 62 D-Index: 54 scientists 63 D-Index: 61 scientists 64 D-Index: 59 scientists 65 D-Index: 58 scientists 66 D-Index: 41 scientists 67 D-Index: 49 scientists 68 D-Index: 39 scientists 69 D-Index: 32 scientists 70 D-Index: 40 scientists 71 D-Index: 47 scientists 72 D-Index: 38 scientists 73 D-Index: 28 scientists 74 D-Index: 29 scientists 75 D-Index: 28 scientists 76 D-Index: 22 scientists 77 D-Index: 21 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 26 scientists 80 D-Index: 19 scientists 81 D-Index: 16 scientists 82 D-Index: 12 scientists 83 D-Index: 16 scientists 84 D-Index: 14 scientists 85 D-Index: 11 scientists 86 D-Index: 17 scientists 87 D-Index: 13 scientists 88 D-Index: 10 scientists 89 D-Index: 12 scientists 90 D-Index: 18 scientists 91 D-Index: 16 scientists 92 D-Index: 16 scientists 93 D-Index: 17 scientists 94 D-Index: 12 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 9 scientists 97 D-Index: 9 scientists 98 D-Index: 11 scientists 99 D-Index: 12 scientists 100 D-Index: 5 scientists 101 D-Index: 8 scientists 102 D-Index: 4 scientists 103 D-Index: 11 scientists 104 D-Index: 5 scientists 105 D-Index: 9 scientists 106 D-Index: 7 scientists 107 D-Index: 4 scientists 108 D-Index: 8 scientists 109+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 109+

This scientist: 55 D-Index — 76th percentile

76% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 109 D-Index or more.

Overview

What is he best known for?

The fields of study he is best known for:

  • Botany
  • Horticulture
  • Thermodynamics

Kenneth A. Shackel mainly investigates Botany, Xylem, Turgor pressure, Horticulture and Transpiration. His work on Vitis vinifera, Apoplast and Ripening as part of general Botany study is frequently connected to Investigation methods, therefore bridging the gap between diverse disciplines of science and establishing a new relationship between them. His work focuses on many connections between Xylem and other disciplines, such as Phloem, that overlap with his field of interest in Pedicel.

His research in Turgor pressure intersects with topics in Membrane function, Boiling and Biochemistry. His biological study focuses on Water stress. His Transpiration research is multidisciplinary, incorporating perspectives in Agronomy, Wilting, Growth rate and Stomatal conductance.

His most cited work include:

  • Stem-water Potential as a Sensitive Indicator of Water Stress in Prune Trees (Prunus domestica L. cv. French) (409 citations)
  • The Dynamics of Embolism Repair in Xylem: In Vivo Visualizations Using High-Resolution Computed Tomography (274 citations)
  • A Reevaluation of the Key Factors That Influence Tomato Fruit Softening and Integrity (271 citations)

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

His scientific interests lie mostly in Botany, Horticulture, Agronomy, Turgor pressure and Irrigation. His study in Xylem, Vitis vinifera, Ripening, Transpiration and Berry are all subfields of Botany. Kenneth A. Shackel has researched Xylem in several fields, including Hydraulic conductivity, Phloem and Anatomy.

His study on Horticulture is mostly dedicated to connecting different topics, such as Sugar. His Crop, Orchard and Water stress study, which is part of a larger body of work in Agronomy, is frequently linked to Deficit irrigation, bridging the gap between disciplines. He usually deals with Turgor pressure and limits it to topics linked to Apoplast and Cell.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Botany (43.97%)
  • Horticulture (39.01%)
  • Agronomy (27.66%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2012-2021)?

  • Horticulture (39.01%)
  • Agronomy (27.66%)
  • Botany (43.97%)

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

Kenneth A. Shackel spends much of his time researching Horticulture, Agronomy, Botany, Orchard and Xylem. His Horticulture study combines topics in areas such as Growing season and Irrigation. His Agronomy study integrates concerns from other disciplines, such as Vineyard and Bark.

In the field of Botany, his study on Ripening overlaps with subjects such as Hydrostatic pressure. His work carried out in the field of Orchard brings together such families of science as Fertilizer and Nut. His Xylem study incorporates themes from Hydraulic conductivity and Vitis vinifera.

Between 2012 and 2021, his most popular works were:

  • In Vivo Visualizations of Drought-Induced Embolism Spread in Vitis vinifera (127 citations)
  • Water Uptake along the Length of Grapevine Fine Roots: Developmental Anatomy, Tissue-Specific Aquaporin Expression, and Pathways of Water Transport (74 citations)
  • Characterization of major ripening events during softening in grape: turgor, sugar accumulation, abscisic acid metabolism, colour development, and their relationship with growth (61 citations)

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

  • Botany
  • Horticulture
  • Thermodynamics

His main research concerns Botany, Xylem, Horticulture, Vitis vinifera and Water transport. Specifically, his work in Botany is concerned with the study of Ripening. His work in the fields of Horticulture, such as Cultivar, Ficus and Carica, overlaps with other areas such as Deficit irrigation.

His Cultivar research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Ostiole and Apoplast. His studies deal with areas such as Flow and Mechanics as well as Vitis vinifera. His Abscisic acid research integrates issues from Catabolism, Softening, Turgor pressure, Sugar and Cell wall.

Best Publications

  • Stem-water Potential as a Sensitive Indicator of Water Stress in Prune Trees (Prunus domestica L. cv. French)

    Harold McCutchan;K.A. Shackel

  • A Reevaluation of the Key Factors That Influence Tomato Fruit Softening and Integrity

    Montserrat Saladié;Antonio J. Matas;Tal Isaacson;Matthew A. Jenks

  • Plant water status as an index of irrigation need in deciduous fruit trees

    Kenneth A. Shackel;H. Ahmadi;W. Biasi;R. Buchner

  • The Dynamics of Embolism Repair in Xylem: In Vivo Visualizations Using High-Resolution Computed Tomography

    Craig R. Brodersen;Andrew J. McElrone;Brendan Choat;Mark A. Matthews

  • Plant Water Status as an Index of Irrigation Needs in Deciduous Fruit Trees

    Kenneth A. Shackel

  • Measurement of vulnerability to water stress‐induced cavitation in grapevine: a comparison of four techniques applied to a long‐vesseled species

    Brendan Choat;William M Drayton;Craig R Brodersen;Mark A Matthews

  • A method for measuring hyphal nutrient and water uptake in mycorrhizal plants

    Ben A. Faber;Robert J. Zasoski;Donald N. Munns;Kenneth Shackel

  • Cell Turgor Changes Associated with Ripening in Tomato Pericarp Tissue

    Kenneth A. Shackel;Carl Greve;John M. Labavitch;Hamid Ahmadi

  • Developmental changes in the diurnal water budget of the grape berry exposed to water deficits

    M. D. Greenspan;K. A. Shackel;M. A. Matthews

  • In Vivo Visualizations of Drought-Induced Embolism Spread in Vitis vinifera

    Craig Robert Brodersen;Andrew Joseph McElrone;Brendan Choat;Eric Franklin Lee

  • Impact of Heating on Carrot Firmness: Contribution of Cellular Turgor

    L. Carl Greve;Ken A. Shackel;Hamid Ahmadi;Richard N. McArdle

  • Functional xylem in the post-veraison grape berry

    Bhaskar R. Bondada;Mark A. Matthews;Kenneth A. Shackel

  • Characterization of major ripening events during softening in grape: turgor, sugar accumulation, abscisic acid metabolism, colour development, and their relationship with growth

    Simone D. Castellarin;Gregory A. Gambetta;Hiroshi Wada;Mark N. Krasnow

  • Vascular function in grape berries across development and its relevance to apparent hydraulic isolation.

    Brendan Choat;Greg A. Gambetta;Kenneth A. Shackel;Mark A. Matthews

  • Water Uptake along the Length of Grapevine Fine Roots: Developmental Anatomy, Tissue-Specific Aquaporin Expression, and Pathways of Water Transport

    Gregory A. Gambetta;Jiong Fei;Thomas L. Rost;Thorsten Knipfer

  • Automated analysis of three-dimensional xylem networks using high-resolution computed tomography

    Craig R. Brodersen;Eric F. Lee;Brendan Choat;Steven Jansen

  • Dynamic Relation between Expansion and Cellular Turgor in Growing Grape ( Vitis vinifera L.) Leaves

    Kenneth A. Shackel;Mark A. Matthews;Janice C. Morrison

  • Fruit ripening in Vitis vinifera: apoplastic solute accumulation accounts for pre-veraison turgor loss in berries

    Hiroshi Wada;Ken A. Shackel;Mark A. Matthews

  • Fruit ripening in Vitis vinifera: spatiotemporal relationships among turgor, sugar accumulation, and anthocyanin biosynthesis.

    Simone D. Castellarin;Greg A. Gambetta;Hiroshi Wada;Ken A. Shackel

  • In Situ Measurement of Epidermal Cell Turgor, Leaf Water Potential, and Gas Exchange in Tradescantia virginiana L.

    Kenneth A. Shackel;Enno Brinckmann

  • Stomatal responses to air humidity and to soil drought.

    Ernst-Detlef Schulze;Neil C. Turner;Thomas Gollan;Kenneth A. Shackel

Frequent Co-Authors

Mark A. Matthews
Mark A. Matthews University of California, Davis
Andrew J. McElrone
Andrew J. McElrone United States Department of Agriculture
Theodore M. DeJong
Theodore M. DeJong University of California, Davis
John M. Labavitch
John M. Labavitch University of California, Davis
Brendan Choat
Brendan Choat Western Sydney University
Craig R. Brodersen
Craig R. Brodersen Yale University
Bruce C. Kirkpatrick
Bruce C. Kirkpatrick University of California, Davis
Gregory A. Gambetta
Gregory A. Gambetta Bordeaux Sciences Agro
Neil C. Turner
Neil C. Turner University of Western Australia
Thomas L. Rost
Thomas L. Rost University of California, Davis

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:

Best Scientists Citing Kenneth A. Shackel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles