World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
47
Citations
10533
World Ranking
5698
National Ranking
441

Kirsty J. Pringle 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 Kirsty J. Pringle 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: 105 publications — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Kirsty J. Pringle 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 Kirsty J. Pringle 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: 47 D-Index — 42nd percentile

42% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Kirsty J. Pringle is affiliated with the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom. Their research focuses on environmental science and earth and planetary sciences, with particular emphasis on atmospheric science and global and planetary change.

The scientist has authored multiple papers primarily addressing atmospheric chemistry and aerosols, air quality and health impacts, and atmospheric aerosols and clouds. Their recent publications include:

  • "Iceland is an episodic source of atmospheric ice-nucleating particles relevant for mixed-phase clouds," 2020, Science Advances
  • "Constraining Uncertainty in Aerosol Direct Forcing," 2020, Geophysical Research Letters
  • "Impact of the 2019/2020 Australian Megafires on Air Quality and Health," 2021, GeoHealth
  • "Robust observational constraint of uncertain aerosol processes and emissions in a climate model and the effect on aerosol radiative forcing," 2020, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • "Constraints on global aerosol number concentration, SO 2 and condensation sink in UKESM1 using ATom measurements," 2021, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Pringle has frequently published in the following venues:

  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • Science Advances
  • Geophysical Research Letters
  • GeoHealth
  • Atmospheric Environment X

Collaborations with other researchers form a significant component of their work. Frequent coauthors include:

  • K. S. Carslaw
  • James B. McQuaid
  • Ailish M. Graham
  • S. R. Arnold
  • Jill S. Johnson

The core topics of their research encompass:

  • Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
  • Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Atmospheric Ozone and Climate
  • Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
  • Vehicle emissions and performance
  • Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting

Their work spans notable subfields such as atmospheric science, global and planetary change, health, toxicology and mutagenesis, pollution, and automotive engineering.

Best Publications

  • Large contribution of natural aerosols to uncertainty in indirect forcing

    K.S. Carslaw;Lindsay Lee;C.L. Reddington;K.J. Pringle

  • Ion-induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles

    Jasper Kirkby;Jasper Kirkby;Jonathan Duplissy;Jonathan Duplissy;Kamalika Sengupta;Carla Frege

  • Multimodel estimates of intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone pollution

    Arlene M. Fiore;F. J. Dentener;O. Wild;C. Cuvelier

  • Global atmospheric particle formation from CERN CLOUD measurements

    Eimear M. Dunne;Hamish Gordon;Andreas Kürten;João Almeida;João Almeida

  • The AeroCom evaluation and intercomparison of organic aerosol in global models

    K. Tsigaridis;K. Tsigaridis;N. Daskalakis;N. Daskalakis;M. Kanakidou;P. J. Adams

  • A multi-model assessment of pollution transport to the Arctic

    D. T. Shindell;M. Chin;F. Dentener;R. M. Doherty

  • Global distribution of the effective aerosol hygroscopicity parameter for CCN activation

    K. J. Pringle;H. Tost;A. Pozzer;U. Pöschl

  • A global off-line model of size-resolved aerosol microphysics: I. Model development and prediction of aerosol properties

    D. V. Spracklen;K. J. Pringle;K. S. Carslaw;M. P. Chipperfield

  • The magnitude and causes of uncertainty in global model simulations of cloud condensation nuclei

    L. A. Lee;K. J. Pringle;C. L. Reddington;G. W. Mann

  • Contribution of feldspar and marine organic aerosols to global ice nucleating particle concentrations

    Jesús Vergara-Temprado;Benjamin J. Murray;Theodore W. Wilson;Daniel O'Sullivan

  • The scavenging processes controlling the seasonal cycle in Arctic sulphate and black carbon aerosol

    J. Browse;K. S. Carslaw;S. R. Arnold;K. Pringle

  • Description and evaluation of GMXe: a new aerosol submodel for global simulations (v1)

    K. J. Pringle;K. J. Pringle;H. Tost;S. Message;B. Steil

  • The direct and indirect radiative effects of biogenic secondary organic aerosol

    C. E. Scott;A. Rap;D. V. Spracklen;P. M. Forster

  • Occurrence of pristine aerosol environments on a polluted planet

    Douglas S. Hamilton;Lindsay A. Lee;Kirsty J. Pringle;Carly L. Reddington

  • Emulation of a complex global aerosol model to quantify sensitivity to uncertain parameters

    L. A. Lee;K. S. Carslaw;K. J. Pringle;G. W. Mann

  • Intercomparison and evaluation of global aerosol microphysical properties among AeroCom models of a range of complexity

    G.W. Mann;K.S. Carslaw;C.L. Reddington;K.J. Pringle;K.J. Pringle

  • Reduced anthropogenic aerosol radiative forcing caused by biogenic new particle formation

    Hamish Gordon;Kamalika Sengupta;Alexandru Rap;Jonathan Duplissy

  • The impact of residential combustion emissions on atmospheric aerosol, human health and climate

    E. W. Butt;A. Rap;A. Schmidt;C. E. Scott

  • Importance of tropospheric volcanic aerosol for indirect radiative forcing of climate

    A. Schmidt;K. S. Carslaw;G. W. Mann;A. Rap

  • Distributions and regional budgets of aerosols and their precursors simulated with the EMAC chemistry-climate model

    A. Pozzer;A. de Meij;K. J. Pringle;H. Tost

  • Contribution of Feldspar and Marine Organic aerosols to global ice nucleating particles concentrations

    Jesús Vergara Temprado;Benjamin J. Murray;Theodore W. Wilson;Daniel O'Sullivan

Frequent Co-Authors

Kenneth S. Carslaw
Kenneth S. Carslaw University of Leeds
Graham W. Mann
Graham W. Mann University of Leeds
Dominick V. Spracklen
Dominick V. Spracklen University of Leeds
Carly L. Reddington
Carly L. Reddington University of Leeds
Alexandru Rap
Alexandru Rap University of Leeds
Philip Stier
Philip Stier University of Oxford
Holger Tost
Holger Tost Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Piers M. Forster
Piers M. Forster University of Leeds
Markku Kulmala
Markku Kulmala University of Helsinki
Nicolas Bellouin
Nicolas Bellouin University of Reading

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 complementary online degrees can broaden career prospects. Budget-friendly online general studies degree programs offer an accessible way to build a strong academic foundation without breaking the bank. These programs often provide flexibility for students balancing work and study.

If you prefer a straightforward academic path, some of the easiest degree to get options can streamline your education while still aligning with environmental topics. These degrees may focus on fundamental skills, preparing graduates for entry-level positions in environmental fields or for further specialization.

For students keen on understanding the earth’s physical properties, the best online geology degree programs provide a specialized curriculum that delves deep into geosciences. These degrees prepare learners for careers in environmental consulting, natural resource management, and research.

Additionally, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is a rapidly growing field integral to environmental studies. The best GIS programs in the US equip students with essential mapping and spatial analysis skills, crucial for roles in conservation, urban planning, and disaster management.

Choosing any of these pathways can enhance your expertise and open diverse opportunities in the environmental sector.

Best Scientists Citing Kirsty J. Pringle

Trending Scientists