World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Lukas Hörtnagl

Lukas Hörtnagl

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
41
Citations
5902
World Ranking
7789
National Ranking
180

Lukas Hörtnagl 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 Lukas Hörtnagl 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: 100 publications — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lukas Hörtnagl 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 Lukas Hörtnagl 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: 41 D-Index — 22nd percentile

22% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Lukas Hörtnagl is affiliated with ETH Zurich in Switzerland and has contributed extensively to the field of Environmental Science. Their research spans various subfields, including Global and Planetary Change, Atmospheric Science, Ecology, Plant Science, and Water Science and Technology.

The scientist has a significant number of publications focused on topics related to Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics, Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics, Climate Variability and Models, Remote Sensing in Agriculture, Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies, Tree-ring Climate Responses, and Fire Effects on Ecosystems.

Lukas Hörtnagl has published multiple research papers, some of which include:

  • Ecosystem transpiration and evaporation: Insights from three water flux partitioning methods across FLUXNET sites, 2020, Global Change Biology
  • FLUXNET-CH 4: a global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands, 2021, Earth system science data
  • Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands, 2021, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
  • Canopy photosynthesis of six major arable crops is enhanced under diffuse light due to canopy architecture, 2020, Global Change Biology
  • Physiological response of Swiss ecosystems to 2018 drought across plant types and elevation, 2020, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences

Their frequent co-authors include:

  • Nina Buchmann
  • Mana Gharun
  • Andrej Varlagin
  • Ladislav Šigut
  • Ivan Mammarella

Lukas Hörtnagl commonly publishes in the following venues:

  • Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
  • Global Change Biology
  • Biogeosciences
  • The Science of The Total Environment
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)

Best Publications

  • The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data

    Gilberto Pastorello;Carlo Trotta;Eleonora Canfora;Housen Chu

  • Ecosystem transpiration and evaporation: Insights from three water flux partitioning methods across FLUXNET sites.

    Jacob A. Nelson;Oscar Pérez-Priego;Sha Zhou;Sha Zhou;Rafael Poyatos

  • FLUXNET-CH4: a global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands

    Kyle B. Delwiche;Sara Helen Knox;Avni Malhotra;Etienne Fluet-Chouinard

  • Interpreting canopy development and physiology using a European phenology camera network at flux sites

    L. Wingate;J. Ogée;E. Cremonese;G. Filippa

  • ICOS eddy covariance flux-station site setup: a review

    Corinna Rebmann;Marc Aubinet;Hape Schmid;Nicola Arriga

  • Eddy covariance raw data processing for CO2 and energy fluxes calculation at ICOS ecosystem stations

    Simone Sabbatini;Ivan Mammarella;Nicola Arriga;Gerardo Fratini

  • First eddy covariance flux measurements by PTR-TOF

    M. Müller;M. Graus;T. M. Ruuskanen;R. Schnitzhofer

  • Eddy covariance VOC emission and deposition fluxes above grassland using PTR-TOF.

    Taina Ruuskanen;Marku Müller;Ralf Schnitzhofer;Thomas Karl

  • Greenhouse gas fluxes over managed grasslands in Central Europe

    Lukas Hörtnagl;Matti Barthel;Nina Buchmann;Werner Eugster

  • Carbonyl sulfide (COS) as a tracer for canopy photosynthesis, transpiration and stomatal conductance: potential and limitations

    Georg Wohlfahrt;Federico Brilli;Lukas Hörtnagl;Xiaobin Xu

  • Standardisation of eddy-covariance flux measurements of methane and nitrous oxide

    Eiko Nemitz;Ivan Mammarella;Andreas Ibrom;Mika Aurela

  • Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes : Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands

    Jeremy Irvin;Sharon Zhou;Gavin McNicol;Fred Lu

  • On the consequences of the energy imbalance for calculating surface conductance to water vapour

    Georg Wohlfahrt;Alois Haslwanter;Lukas Hörtnagl;Richard L. Jasoni

  • Quantifying the effect of forest age in annual net forest carbon balance

    Simon Besnard;Simon Besnard;Nuno Carvalhais;Nuno Carvalhais;M Altaf Arain;Andrew Black

  • Interpreting canopy development and physiology using the EUROPhen camera network at flux sites

    Lisa Wingate;Jerome Ogée;Edoardo Cremonese;Gianluca Filippa

  • Towards long-term standardised carbon and greenhouse gas observations for monitoring Europe's terrestrial ecosystems: a review

    Daniela Franz;Manuel Acosta;Núria Altimir;Nicola Arriga

  • Physiological response of Swiss ecosystems to 2018 drought across plant types and elevation

    Mana Gharun;Lukas Hörtnagl;Eugénie Paul-Limoges;Shiva Ghiasi

  • Qualitative and quantitative characterization of volatile organic compound emissions from cut grass

    Federico Brilli;Lukas Hörtnagl;Ines Bamberger;Ralf Schnitzhofer

  • Canopy photosynthesis of six major arable crops is enhanced under diffuse light due to canopy architecture

    Carmen Emmel;Petra D'Odorico;Andrew Revill;Andrew Revill;Lukas Hörtnagl

  • X-BASE: the first terrestrial carbon and water flux products from an extended data-driven scaling framework, FLUXCOM-X

    Unknown

  • Insights from independent evapotranspiration estimates for closing the energy balance: a grassland case study.

    Georg Wohlfahrt;Christoph Irschick;Bettina Thalinger;Lukas Hörtnagl

Frequent Co-Authors

Georg Wohlfahrt
Georg Wohlfahrt University of Innsbruck
Nina Buchmann
Nina Buchmann ETH Zurich
Armin Hansel
Armin Hansel University of Innsbruck
Martin Graus
Martin Graus University of Innsbruck
Werner Eugster
Werner Eugster ETH Zurich
Lutz Merbold
Lutz Merbold Agroscope
Leonardo Montagnani
Leonardo Montagnani Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
Bert Gielen
Bert Gielen University of Antwerp
Ivan Mammarella
Ivan Mammarella University of Helsinki
Markus D. Müller
Markus D. Müller RWTH Aachen 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

Studying Environmental Sciences in the USA opens doors to various interdisciplinary career paths. For those interested in public administration roles focusing on environmental policy, exploring a 1 year mpa online can be an efficient way to enhance leadership skills quickly.

Social factors greatly influence environmental issues. Pursuing online bachelors degree programs in sociology can provide essential insights into human behavior and community dynamics, which are crucial for designing sustainable solutions.

For education professionals aiming to specialize in environmental education or community outreach, advanced degrees are key. Many consider pursuing an edd without dissertation to focus more on practical applications and leadership, avoiding the traditional dissertation process.

Additionally, for educators wanting to advance further, enrolling in eds to edd bridge program offers a streamlined path from a master’s-level degree to a doctorate, supporting deeper expertise relevant to environmental education and policy implementation.

Best Scientists Citing Lukas Hörtnagl

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles