World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
45
Citations
8917
World Ranking
6343
National Ranking
162

Kirsten M. de Beurs 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 Kirsten M. de Beurs 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: 186 publications — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Kirsten M. de Beurs 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 Kirsten M. de Beurs 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.

Best Publications

  • Intercomparison, interpretation, and assessment of spring phenology in North America estimated from remote sensing for 1982-2006

    Michael A. White;Kirsten M. de Beurs;Kamel Didan;David W. Inouye

  • Land surface phenology, climatic variation, and institutional change: Analyzing agricultural land cover change in Kazakhstan

    Kirsten M de Beurs;Geoffrey M Henebry

  • Interpolation techniques for climate variables

    A.D. Hartkamp;K. De Beurs;A. Stein;J.W. White

  • Changes in the extent of surface mining and reclamation in the Central Appalachians detected using a 1976-2006 Landsat time series

    Philip A. Townsend;David P. Helmers;Clayton C. Kingdon;Brenden E. McNeil

  • Evaluation of Landsat and MODIS data fusion products for analysis of dryland forest phenology

    J.J. Walker;K.M. de Beurs;R.H. Wynne;F. Gao

  • Spatio-Temporal Statistical Methods for Modelling Land Surface Phenology

    Kirsten M. de Beurs;Geoffrey M. Henebry

  • A statistical framework for the analysis of long image time series

    K. M. De Beurs;G. M. Henebry

  • Land surface phenology and temperature variation in the International Geosphere–Biosphere Program high‐latitude transects

    Kirsten M. De Beurs;Geoffrey M. Henebry

  • Identifying priority sites for low impact development (LID) in a mixed-use watershed

    Chelsea J. Martin-Mikle;Kirsten M. de Beurs;Jason P. Julian;Paul M. Mayer

  • Global phenological response to climate change in crop areas using satellite remote sensing of vegetation, humidity and temperature over 26years

    M.E. Brown;K.M. de Beurs;M. Marshall

  • Kriging and thin plate splines for mapping climate variables

    Unknown

  • The response of African land surface phenology to large scale climate oscillations

    Molly E. Brown;Kirsten de Beurs;Anton Vrieling

  • Dryland vegetation phenology across an elevation gradient in Arizona, USA, investigated with fused MODIS and Landsat data

    J.J. Walker;K.M. de Beurs;R.H. Wynne

  • Using multiple remote sensing perspectives to identify and attribute land surface dynamics in Central Asia 2001–2013

    Kirsten M. de Beurs;Geoffrey M. Henebry;Braden C. Owsley;Irina Sokolik

  • Remote sensing of crop residue cover using multi-temporal Landsat imagery

    Unknown

  • Evaluation of multi-sensor semi-arid crop season parameters based on NDVI and rainfall

    Molly E. Brown;Kirsten M. de Beurs

  • Variability of African Farming Systems from Phenological Analysis of NDVI Time Series

    Anton Vrieling;Kirsten M. de Beurs;Molly E. Brown

  • Nutrient dilution and climate cycles underlie declines in a dominant insect herbivore

    Ellen A R Welti;Karl A Roeder;Kirsten M de Beurs;Anthony Joern

  • Dual scale trend analysis for evaluating climatic and anthropogenic effects on the vegetated land surface in Russia and Kazakhstan

    K M de Beurs;C K Wright;G M Henebry

  • River water quality changes in New Zealand over 26 years: response to land use intensity

    Jason P. Julian;Jason P. Julian;Kirsten M. de Beurs;Braden Owsley;Robert J. Davies-Colley

Frequent Co-Authors

Geoffrey M. Henebry
Geoffrey M. Henebry Michigan State University
Michael Kaspari
Michael Kaspari University of Oklahoma
Alexander V. Prishchepov
Alexander V. Prishchepov University of Copenhagen
Molly E. Brown
Molly E. Brown University of Maryland, College Park
Irina N. Sokolik
Irina N. Sokolik Georgia Institute of Technology
Alfred Stein
Alfred Stein University of Twente
Michael D. Weiser
Michael D. Weiser University of Oklahoma
Jeffrey F. Kelly
Jeffrey F. Kelly University of Oklahoma
Nathan J. Sanders
Nathan J. Sanders University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Pavel Ya. Groisman
Pavel Ya. Groisman North Carolina 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 passionate about Environmental Sciences, exploring related fields such as sociology can provide valuable insights into human-environment interactions. Pursuing a sociology bachelor degree online offers flexible learning options that complement environmental studies and broaden career opportunities.

Advancing your education with leadership-focused degrees is another pathway. Online EdD programs without dissertation requirements can be a practical choice for professionals aiming to enhance their educational and administrative skills quickly. Discovering the best online edd programs no dissertation ensures you don’t spend extra time on lengthy research projects.

For those considering progression in their educational doctorate journey, understanding the top programs is crucial. The best eds to edd programs offer streamlined transitions that strengthen expertise in education leadership and policy, valuable for environmental education roles.

Social work also intersects with environmental challenges, addressing community resilience and social justice. Finding the cheapest dsw program online can make earning a doctorate in social work more accessible, opening doors to impactful careers in environmental advocacy and support services.

Best Scientists Citing Kirsten M. de Beurs

Recently Published Articles