World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Biology and Biochemistry

D-Index
76
Citations
26631
World Ranking
4962
National Ranking
2384

Linda M. Hendershot publication distribution in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Biology and Biochemistry in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Linda M. Hendershot sits on this spectrum.

47–56 publications: 8 scientists 57–66 publications: 35 scientists 67–76 publications: 106 scientists 77–86 publications: 231 scientists 87–96 publications: 414 scientists 97–106 publications: 546 scientists 107–116 publications: 704 scientists 117–126 publications: 849 scientists 127–136 publications: 980 scientists 137–146 publications: 942 scientists 147–156 publications: 969 scientists 157–166 publications: 950 scientists 167–176 publications: 951 scientists 177–186 publications: 915 scientists 187–196 publications: 787 scientists 197–206 publications: 841 scientists 207–216 publications: 735 scientists 217–226 publications: 709 scientists 227–236 publications: 651 scientists 237–246 publications: 605 scientists 247–256 publications: 510 scientists 257–266 publications: 524 scientists 267–276 publications: 434 scientists 277–286 publications: 418 scientists 287–296 publications: 350 scientists 297–306 publications: 363 scientists 307–316 publications: 315 scientists 317–326 publications: 296 scientists 327–336 publications: 261 scientists 337–346 publications: 240 scientists 347–356 publications: 219 scientists 357–366 publications: 197 scientists 367–376 publications: 154 scientists 377–386 publications: 161 scientists 387–396 publications: 155 scientists 397–406 publications: 145 scientists 407–416 publications: 124 scientists 417–426 publications: 112 scientists 427–436 publications: 132 scientists 437–446 publications: 116 scientists 447–456 publications: 99 scientists 457–466 publications: 81 scientists 467–476 publications: 91 scientists 477–486 publications: 80 scientists 487–496 publications: 80 scientists 497–506 publications: 60 scientists 507–516 publications: 36 scientists 517–526 publications: 46 scientists 527–536 publications: 54 scientists 537–546 publications: 44 scientists 547–556 publications: 43 scientists 557–566 publications: 43 scientists 567–576 publications: 42 scientists 577–586 publications: 25 scientists 587–596 publications: 34 scientists 597–606 publications: 23 scientists 607–616 publications: 33 scientists 617–626 publications: 31 scientists 627–636 publications: 27 scientists 637–646 publications: 25 scientists 647–656 publications: 28 scientists 657–666 publications: 34 scientists 667–676 publications: 18 scientists 677–686 publications: 16 scientists 687–696 publications: 10 scientists 697–706 publications: 12 scientists 707–716 publications: 21 scientists 717–726 publications: 12 scientists 727–736 publications: 12 scientists 737–746 publications: 10 scientists 747–756 publications: 7 scientists 757–766 publications: 13 scientists 767–776 publications: 15 scientists 777–786 publications: 13 scientists 787–796 publications: 9 scientists 797–806 publications: 9 scientists 807–816 publications: 7 scientists 817–826 publications: 4 scientists 827–836 publications: 9 scientists 837–846 publications: 7 scientists 847–856 publications: 3 scientists 857–866 publications: 5 scientists 867–876 publications: 5 scientists 877–886 publications: 11 scientists 887–896 publications: 3 scientists 897–906 publications: 4 scientists 907–916 publications: 7 scientists 917–926 publications: 5 scientists 927–936 publications: 6 scientists 937–946 publications: 6 scientists 947–956 publications: 3 scientists 957–966 publications: 7 scientists 967–976 publications: 2 scientists 977–986 publications: 2 scientists 987–996 publications: 1 scientists 997–1,006 publications: 5 scientists 1,007–1,016 publications: 2 scientists 1,017–1,026 publications: 2 scientists 1,027 publications: 1 scientists 1,028+ publications: 100 scientists
47 publications 1,028+

This scientist: 150 publications — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,028 publications or more.

Linda M. Hendershot D-index placement in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Biology and Biochemistry scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Linda M. Hendershot sits on this spectrum.

40–41 D-Index: 80 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 183 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 317 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 504 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 718 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 900 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 1,026 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 1,150 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 1,236 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 1,253 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 1,163 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 1,131 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 1,032 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 897 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 814 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 715 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 709 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 596 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 512 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 473 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 412 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 373 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 358 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 285 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 273 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 227 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 208 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 193 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 153 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 157 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 148 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 120 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 113 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 100 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 86 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 67 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 72 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 73 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 64 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 53 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 60 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 54 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 43 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 38 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 49 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 26 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 18 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 23 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 32 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 32 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 27 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 19 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 22 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 12 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 16 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 14 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 10 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 13 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 10 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 7 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 9 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 13 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 4 scientists 166 D-Index: 4 scientists 167+ D-Index: 98 scientists
40 D-Index 167+

This scientist: 76 D-Index — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 167 D-Index or more.

Overview

Linda M. Hendershot is affiliated with St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology, with significant contributions spanning several subfields including cell biology, molecular biology, immunology, epidemiology, and surgery.

The scientist's work addresses various main topics, most notably endoplasmic reticulum stress and disease. Other topics of research covered in their publications include heat shock proteins research, RNA regulation and disease, toxin mechanisms and immunotoxins, autophagy in disease and therapy, coenzyme Q10 studies and effects, and pancreatic function and diabetes.

Linda M. Hendershot has published multiple papers in reputable venues. Recent notable publications include:

  • "Reshaping endoplasmic reticulum quality control through the unfolded protein response", 2022, Molecular Cell
  • "The Essential Functions of Molecular Chaperones and Folding Enzymes in Maintaining Endoplasmic Reticulum Homeostasis", 2023, Journal of Molecular Biology
  • "Role of the HSP70 Co-Chaperone SIL1 in Health and Disease", 2021, International Journal of Molecular Sciences
  • "The molecular chaperone GRP170 protects against ER stress and acute kidney injury in mice", 2022, JCI Insight
  • "Mapping SP-C co-chaperone binding sites reveals molecular consequences of disease-causing mutations on protein maturation", 2022, Nature Communications

Their frequent coauthors include Jeffrey L. Brodsky, Teresa M. Buck, Melissa J. Mann, Ashley R. Flory, and Aidan W. Porter. This collaborative network reflects a strong connection to expert groups working on molecular chaperones and protein folding.

Common publication venues for their work include the Journal of Molecular Biology, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, Molecular Cell, and the International Journal of Molecular Sciences. The scientist has multiple papers published in these journals, reflecting an ongoing research presence in these forums.

Beyond articles, Linda M. Hendershot has also contributed to book publications, including a title published by Frontiers Media in 2023 titled "Protein Homeostasis in Growth, Development and Disease."

Best Publications

  • Dynamic interaction of BiP and ER stress transducers in the unfolded-protein response

    Anne Bertolotti;Yuhong Zhang;Linda M. Hendershot;Linda M. Hendershot;Heather P. Harding

  • ER stress regulation of ATF6 localization by dissociation of BiP/GRP78 binding and unmasking of Golgi localization signals.

    Jingshi Shen;Xi Chen;Linda Hendershot;Linda Hendershot;Ron Prywes

  • Posttranslational association of immunoglobulin heavy chain binding protein with nascent heavy chains in nonsecreting and secreting hybridomas.

    D G Bole;L M Hendershot;J F Kearney

  • The role of the unfolded protein response in tumour development: friend or foe?

    Yanjun Ma;Linda M. Hendershot

  • Two distinct stress signaling pathways converge upon the CHOP promoter during the mammalian unfolded protein response.

    Yanjun Ma;Joseph W. Brewer;J. Alan Diehl;Linda M. Hendershot;Linda M. Hendershot

  • Signals from the stressed endoplasmic reticulum induce C/EBP-homologous protein (CHOP/GADD153).

    Xiao Zhong Wang;Beth Lawson;Joseph W. Brewer;Hélène Zinszner

  • A subset of chaperones and folding enzymes form multiprotein complexes in endoplasmic reticulum to bind nascent proteins.

    Laurent Meunier;Young Kwang Usherwood;Kyung Tae Chung;Linda M. Hendershot

  • BiP Maintains the Permeability Barrier of the ER Membrane by Sealing the Lumenal End of the Translocon Pore before and Early in Translocation

    Brian D Hamman;Linda M Hendershot;Arthur E Johnson

  • The ER function BiP is a master regulator of ER function.

    Linda M Hendershot

  • ER chaperone functions during normal and stress conditions.

    Yanjun Ma;Linda M. Hendershot;Linda M. Hendershot

  • The unfolding tale of the unfolded protein response

    Yanjun Ma;Linda M. Hendershot;Linda M. Hendershot

  • Delineation of a Negative Feedback Regulatory Loop That Controls Protein Translation during Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress

    Yanjun Ma;Linda M. Hendershot;Linda M. Hendershot

  • Assembly and secretion of heavy chains that do not associate posttranslationally with immunoglobulin heavy chain-binding protein.

    L Hendershot;D Bole;G Köhler;J F Kearney

  • Immunoglobulin binding protein (BiP) function is required to protect cells from endoplasmic reticulum stress but is not required for the secretion of selective proteins.

    Jill A. Morris;Andrew J. Dorner;Chris A. Edwards;Linda M. Hendershot

  • The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) chaperone BiP is a master regulator of ER functions: Getting by with a little help from ERdj friends

    Kristine Faye R. Pobre;Greg J. Poet;Linda M. Hendershot

  • Mammalian unfolded protein response inhibits cyclin D1 translation and cell-cycle progression

    Joseph W. Brewer;Linda M. Hendershot;Charles J. Sherr;J. Alan Diehl

  • BiP, a major chaperone protein of the endoplasmic reticulum lumen, plays a direct and important role in the storage of the rapidly exchanging pool of Ca2+

    Jean Philippe Lièvremont;Rosario Rizzuto;Linda Hendershot;Jacopo Meldolesi

  • GM1-ganglioside-mediated activation of the unfolded protein response causes neuronal death in a neurodegenerative gangliosidosis.

    Alessandra Tessitore;Maria del P. Martin;Renata Sano;Yanjun Ma

  • Mutations in SIL1 cause Marinesco-Sjogren syndrome, a cerebellar ataxia with cataract and myopathy

    J. Senderek;M. Krieger;C. Stendel;C. Bergmann

  • Dynamic interaction of BiP and ER stress transducers in the unfolded

    Anne Bertolotti;Yuhong Zhang;Linda M. Hendershot;David Ron

Frequent Co-Authors

David Ron
David Ron University of Cambridge
Johannes Buchner
Johannes Buchner Technical University of Munich
Heather P. Harding
Heather P. Harding University of Cambridge
Junmin Peng
Junmin Peng St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
John F. Kearney
John F. Kearney University of Alabama at Birmingham
Jeffrey L. Brodsky
Jeffrey L. Brodsky University of Pittsburgh
Mondira Kundu
Mondira Kundu St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
Douglas R. Green
Douglas R. Green St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
Randal J. Kaufman
Randal J. Kaufman Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute
Amy S. Lee
Amy S. Lee University of Southern California

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

A background in Biology or Biochemistry can lead to diverse online degree options and dynamic career pathways. Many students are now exploring roles in health information management, where analytical and organizational skills are in high demand. Pursuing a bachelor's degree health information management can open doors to various opportunities in healthcare data, medical coding, and compliance.

Medical coding is another in-demand field attracting Biology and Biochemistry graduates. When considering certification, comparing ccs certification versus other credentials helps students choose the best fit for their professional goals. Many prospective coders also research certified medical coder salary expectations and advancement potential before committing.

While medical billing and coding offers solid job prospects, it is important to weigh is medical coding a good career for your lifestyle, interests, and goals. As online programs expand, students can prepare for these roles conveniently and affordably, making them attractive options for those with a science background seeking fast-growing, flexible careers.

Best Scientists Citing Linda M. Hendershot

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles