World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
62
Citations
29333
World Ranking
2542
National Ranking
1018

Mark Flanner 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 Mark Flanner 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: 189 publications — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mark Flanner 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 Mark Flanner 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: 62 D-Index — 74th percentile

74% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mark Flanner is a researcher affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their scholarly work primarily spans the fields of Earth and Planetary Sciences, with a strong emphasis on Atmospheric Science and Environmental Science.

Their research focuses on several interconnected topics, notably cryospheric studies and observations, atmospheric and environmental gas dynamics, and atmospheric chemistry and aerosols. Other areas of interest include atmospheric aerosols and clouds, polar research and ecology, climate change and permafrost, and meteorological phenomena and simulations.

Mark Flanner has published extensively in various academic venues. Frequent publication venues include:

  • The Cryosphere
  • Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Some of their recent papers are:

  • "Glacier algae accelerate melt rates on the south-western Greenland Ice Sheet" (2020), published in The Cryosphere
  • "SNICAR-ADv3: a community tool for modeling spectral snow albedo" (2021), published in Geoscientific Model Development
  • "Using ICESat-2 and Operation IceBridge altimetry for supraglacial lake depth retrievals" (2020), published in The Cryosphere
  • "Model evaluation of short-lived climate forcers for the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme: a multi-species, multi-model study" (2022), published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
  • "SNICAR-ADv4: a physically based radiative transfer model to represent the spectral albedo of glacier ice" (2022), published in The Cryosphere

Their work has involved collaborations with several frequent co-authors, including Cenlin He, Joseph M. Cook, Chloe A. Whicker, Charles S. Zender, and Cheng Dang. These collaborations have contributed to the development of knowledge in their fields of study.

Best Publications

  • Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific assessment

    Tami C. Bond;Sarah J. Doherty;D. W. Fahey;Piers Forster

  • The Community Land Model version 5 : description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty

    David M. Lawrence;Rosie A. Fisher;Charles D. Koven;Keith W. Oleson

  • Parameterization improvements and functional and structural advances in version 4 of the Community Land Model

    David M Lawrence;Keith W Oleson;Mark G Flanner;Peter E Thornton

  • Present-day climate forcing and response from black carbon in snow

    Mark G. Flanner;Charles S. Zender;James T. Randerson;Philip J. Rasch

  • The impact of boreal forest fire on climate warming.

    J. T. Randerson;H. Liu;M. G. Flanner;S. D. Chambers

  • Toward a Minimal Representation of Aerosols in Climate Models: Description and Evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5

    Xiaohong Liu;Richard C. Easter;Steven J. Ghan;Rahul A. Zaveri

  • The DOE E3SM Coupled Model Version 1: Overview and Evaluation at Standard Resolution

    Jean Christophe Golaz;Peter M. Caldwell;Luke P. Van Roekel;Mark R. Petersen

  • The size distribution of desert dust aerosols and its impact on the Earth system

    Natalie Mahowald;Samuel Albani;Jasper F. Kok;Jasper F. Kok;Sebastian Engelstaeder

  • 20th-century industrial black carbon emissions altered Arctic climate forcing.

    Joseph R. McConnell;Ross Edwards;Gregory L. Kok;Mark G. Flanner

  • Springtime warming and reduced snow cover from carbonaceous particles

    M. G. Flanner;C. S. Zender;P. G. Hess;P. G. Hess;N. M. Mahowald;N. M. Mahowald

  • Linking snowpack microphysics and albedo evolution

    Mark G. Flanner;Charles S. Zender

  • Radiative forcing and albedo feedback from the Northern Hemisphere cryosphere between 1979 and 2008

    M. G. Flanner;K. M. Shell;M. Barlage;D. K. Perovich

  • Observed 20th century desert dust variability: impact on climate and biogeochemistry

    Natalie Mahowald;Silvia Kloster;S. Engelstaedter;Jefferson Keith Moore

  • Short-lived pollutants in the Arctic: their climate impact and possible mitigation strategies

    P. K. Quinn;T. S. Bates;E. Baum;N. Doubleday

  • Radiative forcing in the ACCMIP historical and future climate simulations

    D.T. Shindell;J.-F. Lamarque;M. Schulz;M. Flanner

  • Radiative forcing by light-absorbing particles in snow

    S. McKenzie Skiles;Mark Flanner;Joseph M. Cook;Marie Dumont

  • The CCSM4 Land Simulation, 1850-2005: Assessment of Surface Climate and New Capabilities

    David M. Lawrence;Keith W. Oleson;Mark G. Flanner;Christopher G. Fletcher

  • An Overview of the Atmospheric Component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model

    P. J. Rasch;S. Xie;P.-L. Ma;W. Lin

  • Integrating anthropogenic heat flux with global climate models

    Mark G. Flanner

  • Sensitivity studies on the impacts of Tibetan Plateau snowpack pollution on the Asian hydrological cycle and monsoon climate

    Yun Qian;M G Flanner;Lai-Yung R Leung;Weiguo Wang

  • Present day Climate Forcing and Response from Black Carbon in Snow

    M. G. Flanner;C. S. Zender;J. T. Randerson;P. J. Rasch

Frequent Co-Authors

Charles S. Zender
Charles S. Zender University of California, Irvine
Natalie M. Mahowald
Natalie M. Mahowald Cornell University
Jack E. Dibb
Jack E. Dibb University of New Hampshire
Thomas H. Painter
Thomas H. Painter University of California, Los Angeles
William J. Collins
William J. Collins University of Reading
Xiaohong Liu
Xiaohong Liu Texas A&M University
Yun Qian
Yun Qian Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Philip J. Rasch
Philip J. Rasch Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Joseph R. McConnell
Joseph R. McConnell Desert Research Institute
Drew T. Shindell
Drew T. Shindell Duke 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

Exploring Environmental Sciences in the USA often leads students to consider complementary or alternative fields online. For those interested in social impact alongside environmental work, pursuing online dsw programs in social work can provide advanced skills to address community and policy challenges. These programs blend social welfare with environmental justice, creating valuable career intersections.

If you're seeking flexibility and affordability, an online general studies bachelor degree cheap pathway might be appealing. This broad educational approach allows students to customize coursework, incorporating environmental topics with other disciplines for a well-rounded degree.

For learners focused on an easier academic path without compromising quality, considering the easiest bachelor's degree to get can help. Many find that selecting a program aligned with their strengths can support timely graduation and entry into the workforce.

Finally, specializing in the Earth's physical processes, a geology online degree is an excellent complement or alternative for environmental science students. It offers focused training valuable for careers in natural resource management, environmental consulting, and research.

Best Scientists Citing Mark Flanner

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles