World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Plant Science and Agronomy

D-Index
44
Citations
7364
World Ranking
3038
National Ranking
761

Larry E. Williams 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 Larry E. Williams 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: 118 publications — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Larry E. Williams 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 Larry E. Williams 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: 44 D-Index — 55th percentile

55% 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
  • Agriculture

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Horticulture, Stomatal conductance, Irrigation, Evapotranspiration and Agronomy. Horticulture is closely attributed to Botany in his study. His Stomatal conductance research focuses on subjects like Anthesis, which are linked to Soil water.

His Irrigation research includes elements of Lysimeter and Growing season. His study in Lysimeter is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Water use, Vine, Canopy and Crop coefficient. Many of his research projects under Agronomy are closely connected to Irrigation in viticulture with Irrigation in viticulture, tying the diverse disciplines of science together.

His most cited work include:

  • Biology of the grapevine. (553 citations)
  • Grapevine water use and the crop coefficient are linear functions of the shaded area measured beneath the canopy (221 citations)
  • Correlations among Predawn Leaf, Midday Leaf, and Midday Stem Water Potential and their Correlations with other Measures of Soil and Plant Water Status in Vitis vinifera (220 citations)

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

His primary areas of investigation include Horticulture, Agronomy, Irrigation, Botany and Evapotranspiration. His Horticulture research incorporates themes from Canopy and Stomatal conductance. His study in the field of Anthesis also crosses realms of Root nodule.

As part of his studies on Irrigation, Larry E. Williams frequently links adjacent subjects like Growing season. His Botany study incorporates themes from Cyanamide and Fumigation. Larry E. Williams has included themes like Veraison, Water use, Soil water, Lysimeter and Drip irrigation in his Evapotranspiration study.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Horticulture (59.77%)
  • Agronomy (34.48%)
  • Irrigation (33.33%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2015-2021)?

  • Horticulture (59.77%)
  • San Joaquin (5.75%)
  • Vine (19.54%)

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

His scientific interests lie mostly in Horticulture, San Joaquin, Vine, Growing season and Cultivar. His work deals with themes such as Cyanamide, Canopy and Irrigation, which intersect with Horticulture. His Irrigation study integrates concerns from other disciplines, such as Leaf water, Wine grape and Vitis vinifera.

While the research belongs to areas of San Joaquin, he spends his time largely on the problem of Crop coefficient, intersecting his research to questions surrounding Lysimeter. His Vine research is multidisciplinary, incorporating elements of Fresh weight, Berry and Crop evapotranspiration. In his study, Vineyard is inextricably linked to Stomatal conductance, which falls within the broad field of Evapotranspiration.

Between 2015 and 2021, his most popular works were:

  • A continuum of stomatal responses to water deficits among 17 wine grape cultivars (Vitis vinifera). (10 citations)
  • Dry Matter Accumulation and Nitrogen and Potassium Partitioning in the Roots and Trunk of Field-Grown Thompson Seedless Grapevines (4 citations)
  • Measured and estimated water use and crop coefficients of grapevines trained to overhead trellis systems in California’s San Joaquin Valley (4 citations)

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

  • Botany
  • Horticulture
  • Agriculture

His main research concerns Horticulture, Vine, Growing season, Irrigation and Remote sensing. In most of his Horticulture studies, his work intersects topics such as Crop coefficient. His Vine study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Shoot, Dry matter, Agronomy, Root system and Anthesis.

The study incorporates disciplines such as Canopy, San Joaquin, Lysimeter, Evapotranspiration and Trellis in addition to Growing season. His Irrigation research integrates issues from Cultivar, Wine grape, Stomatal conductance, Leaf water and Vitis vinifera. His Remote sensing research focuses on Multispectral image in particular.

Best Publications

  • Biology of the grapevine.

    Michael G. Mullins;Alain Bouquet;Larry Edward Williams

  • Correlations among Predawn Leaf, Midday Leaf, and Midday Stem Water Potential and their Correlations with other Measures of Soil and Plant Water Status in Vitis vinifera

    L.E. Williams;F.J. Araujo

  • Grapevine water use and the crop coefficient are linear functions of the shaded area measured beneath the canopy

    L.E. Williams;J.E. Ayars

  • A PRI-based water stress index combining structural and chlorophyll effects: Assessment using diurnal narrow-band airborne imagery and the CWSI thermal index

    P.J. Zarco-Tejada;V. González-Dugo;L.E. Williams;L. Suárez

  • Irrigation effects on plant water relations and productivity of Thompson seedless grapevines

    D. W. Grimes;L. E. Williams

  • Water use of mature Thompson Seedless grapevines in California

    L. E. Williams;C. J. Phene;D. W. Grimes;T. J. Trout

  • Relationships among Ambient Temperature and Vapor Pressure Deficit and Leaf and Stem Water Potentials of Fully Irrigated, Field-Grown Grapevines

    Larry E. Williams;Pilar Baeza

  • Net CO2 Assimilation and Carbohydrate Partitioning of Grapevine Leaves in Response to Trunk Girdling and Gibberellic Acid Application

    Teryl R. Roper;Larry E. Williams

  • High-quality RNA, cDNA, and derived EST libraries from grapevine ( Vitis vinifera L.)

    A. B. Iandolino;F. Goes da Silva;H. Lim;H. Choi

  • Growth of 'Thompson Seedless' grapevines. I. Leaf area development and dry weight distribution

    L.E. Williams

  • The Effect of Rootstock on the Partitioning of Dry Weight, Nitrogen and Potassium, and Root Distribution of Cabernet Sauvignon Grapevines

    Larry E. Williams;Rhonda J. Smith

  • Chilling Exposure and Hydrogen Cyanamide Interact in Breaking Dormancy of Grape Buds

    N.K. Dokoozlian;L.E. Williams;R.A. Neja

  • Water use of Thompson Seedless grapevines as affected by the application of gibberellic acid (GA3) and trunk girdling – practices to increase berry size

    L.E. Williams;J.E. Ayars

  • The Influence of Rootstock on Leaf Water Potential, Yield, and Berry Composition of Ruby Seedless Grapevines

    Abdelazziz Ezzahouani;Larry E. Williams

  • Relationships among Vine- and Soil-Based Measures of Water Status in a Thompson Seedless Vineyard in Response to High-Frequency Drip Irrigation

    Larry E. Williams;Thomas J. Trout

  • Vine Water Relations, Gas Exchange, and Vegetative Growth of Seventeen Vitis Species Grown under Irrigated and Nonirrigated Conditions in California

    M. Padgett-Johnson;L.E. Williams;M.A. Walker

  • MANIPULATING VINEYARD IRRIGATION AMOUNTS TO REDUCE INSECT PEST DAMAGE

    K. M. Daane;L. E. Williams

  • The effects of applied water at various fractions of measured evapotranspiration on reproductive growth and water productivity of Thompson Seedless grapevines

    Larry E. Williams;D. W. Grimes;C. J. Phene;C. J. Phene

  • A comparative study of young ‘Thompson Seedless’ grapevines under drip and furrow irrigation. I. Root and soil water distributions

    Francisco Araujo;Larry E. Williams;Donald W. Grimes;Mark A. Matthews

  • Validation of a Model for the Growth and Development of the Thompson Seedless Grapevine. II. Phenology

    D. W. Williams;H. L. Andris;R. H. Beede;D. A. Luvisi

  • Partitioning of Dry Weight, Nitrogen, and Potassium in Cabernet Sauvignon Grapevines From Anthesis Until Harvest

    Larry E. Williams;Peter J. Biscay

  • Midday measurements of leaf water potential and stomatal conductance are highly correlated with daily water use of Thompson Seedless grapevines

    L. E. Williams;P. Baeza;P. Vaughn

  • 2-Methoxy-3-isobutylpyrazine in grape berries and its dependence on genotype

    Alfredo Koch;Carolyn L. Doyle;Mark A. Matthews;Larry E. Williams

  • Dry matter and nitrogen partitioning and root growth of young field-grown Thompson Seedless grapevines

    F. J. Araujo;L. E. Williams

  • A comparative study of young ‘Thompson Seedless’ grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) under drip and furrow irrigation. II. Growth, water use efficiency and nitrogen partitioning

    Francisco Araujo;Larry E. Williams;Mark A. Matthews

  • A Novel Machine Learning Approach to Estimate Grapevine Leaf Nitrogen Concentration Using Aerial Multispectral Imagery

    Ali Moghimi;Alireza Pourreza;German Zuniga-Ramirez;Larry E. Williams

Frequent Co-Authors

Theodore M. DeJong
Theodore M. DeJong University of California, Davis
Mark A. Matthews
Mark A. Matthews University of California, Davis
Donald A. Phillips
Donald A. Phillips University of California, Davis
Andrew J. McElrone
Andrew J. McElrone United States Department of Agriculture
Thomas J. Trout
Thomas J. Trout Agricultural Research Service
Kent M. Daane
Kent M. Daane University of California, Berkeley
Elias Fereres
Elias Fereres University of Córdoba
Richard L. Snyder
Richard L. Snyder University of California, Davis
Randall S. Johnson
Randall S. Johnson University of Cambridge
Susan E. Ebeler
Susan E. Ebeler 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 Larry E. Williams

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles