World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Environmental Sciences 47 5659 5427 438 425 89 20680

Mark R. Lomas publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Mark R. Lomas between 1997 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Mark R. Lomas published across 29 years, from 1997 to 2025, averaging 3.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 14 publications in 2013. 1 of the 91 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1997 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 14. Peak 14 publications in 2013. 1997: 1 publication 1998: 2 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 0 publications 2001: 2 publications 2002: 1 publication 2003: 1 publication 2004: 6 publications 2005: 3 publications 2006: 0 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 4 publications 2009: 1 publication 2010: 6 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 5 publications 2013: 14 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 12 publications 2016: 4 publications 2017: 4 publications 2018: 3 publications 2019: 2 publications 2020: 2 publications 2021: 0 publications 2022: 2 publications 2023: 1 publication 2024: 0 publications 2025: 1 publication
1997 2025

91 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Mark R. Lomas: publications per year, 1997 to 2025
Year Publications
1997 1
1998 2
1999 0
2000 0
2001 2
2002 1
2003 1
2004 6
2005 3
2006 0
2007 3
2008 4
2009 1
2010 6
2011 2
2012 5
2013 14
2014 9
2015 12
2016 4
2017 4
2018 3
2019 2
2020 2
2021 0
2022 2
2023 1
2024 0
2025 1
Total 91
Download as CSV

Mark R. Lomas 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 R. Lomas sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 66 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 41–50 to 690+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 617. Most scientists, 617, have 121–130 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 81–90 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 282 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: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 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 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41–50 publications 690+

This scientist: 89 publications — 8th percentile

8% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
41–50 21
51–60 62
61–70 133
71–80 257
81–90 361 89
91–100 440
101–110 492
111–120 541
121–130 617
131–140 544
141–150 541
151–160 539
161–170 444
171–180 444
181–190 400
191–200 377
201–210 318
211–220 282
221–230 263
231–240 220
241–250 217
251–260 180
261–270 181
271–280 155
281–290 130
291–300 127
301–310 130
311–320 85
321–330 106
331–340 80
341–350 83
351–360 75
361–370 69
371–380 52
381–390 54
391–400 56
401–410 44
411–420 40
421–430 36
431–440 25
441–450 25
451–460 32
461–470 29
471–480 21
481–490 26
491–500 26
501–510 17
511–520 19
521–530 15
531–540 22
541–550 12
551–560 15
561–570 11
571–580 19
581–590 9
591–600 9
601–610 7
611–620 11
621–630 5
631–640 5
641–650 6
651–660 3
661–670 3
671–680 4
681–689 4
690+ 100
Download as CSV

Mark R. Lomas 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 R. Lomas sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 126+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 348. Most scientists, 348, have 45 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 47 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 198 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: 20 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: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

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 126 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 12
31 26
32 51
33 88
34 123
35 163
36 206
37 267
38 265
39 275
40 321
41 343
42 305
43 336
44 330
45 348
46 291
47 275 47
48 272
49 273
50 263
51 232
52 266
53 217
54 198
55 177
56 202
57 204
58 166
59 177
60 166
61 152
62 143
63 150
64 124
65 119
66 120
67 118
68 82
69 98
70 94
71 105
72 74
73 84
74 70
75 67
76 78
77 60
78 59
79 52
80 47
81 38
82 48
83 42
84 42
85 43
86 29
87 37
88 29
89 30
90 34
91 20
92 22
93 17
94 19
95 24
96 21
97 20
98 24
99 17
100 17
101 21
102 25
103 18
104 26
105 20
106 15
107 10
108 13
109 15
110 12
111 8
112 7
113 9
114 6
115 12
116 7
117 8
118 3
119 5
120 7
121 2
122 4
123 8
124 7
125 9
126+ 92
Download as CSV

Overview

Mark R. Lomas is affiliated with the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on Environmental Science and Earth and Planetary Sciences, with a notable emphasis on Environmental Engineering and Global and Planetary Change. Their work spans subfields including Geophysics, Mechanical Engineering, and Biomaterials.

The main topics covered in Mark R. Lomas's research include:

  • CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
  • Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
  • Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
  • Geological and Geochemical Analysis
  • Geological and Geophysical Studies Worldwide
  • Clay minerals and soil interactions
  • Geochemistry and Elemental Analysis

Their recent publications reflect this focus, including:

  • Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands, 2020, Nature
  • Increased yield and CO2 sequestration potential with the C4 cereal Sorghum bicolor cultivated in basaltic rock dust-amended agricultural soil, 2020, Global Change Biology
  • Substantial carbon drawdown potential from enhanced rock weathering in the United Kingdom, 2022, Nature Geoscience
  • Transforming US agriculture for carbon removal with enhanced weathering, 2025, Nature
  • Transforming U.S. agriculture with crushed rock for CO2 sequestration and increased production, 2023, arXiv (Cornell University)

Mark R. Lomas frequently collaborates with several researchers including:

  • David J. Beerling
  • Steven A. Banwart
  • Euripides P. Kantzas
  • Rafael M. Eufrasio
  • Phil Renforth

Their work has been published predominantly in journals such as:

  • Nature
  • Global Change Biology
  • Nature Geoscience
  • arXiv (Cornell University)

Best Publications

  • Terrestrial Gross Carbon Dioxide Uptake: Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate

    Christian Beer;Markus Reichstein;Enrico Tomelleri;Philippe Ciais

  • Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models

    Wolfgang Cramer;Alberte Bondeau;F. Ian Woodward;I. Colin Prentice

  • Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide

    Corinne Le Quéré;Corinne Le Quéré;Michael R. Raupach;Josep G. Canadell;Gregg Marland

  • Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate‐carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs)

    Stephan Sitch;C. Huntingford;N. Gedney;P. E. Levy

  • Recent trends and drivers of regional sources and sinks of carbon dioxide

    S. Sitch;P. Friedlingstein;N. Gruber;S. D. Jones

  • Evaluation of terrestrial carbon cycle models for their response to climate variability and to CO2 trends.

    Shilong Piao;Shilong Piao;Stephen Sitch;Philippe Ciais;Pierre Friedlingstein

  • The global carbon budget 1959-2011

    C. Le Quere;R.J. Andres;T.A. Boden;T. Conway

  • Carbon residence time dominates uncertainty in terrestrial vegetation responses to future climate and atmospheric CO2

    Andrew D. Friend;Wolfgang Lucht;Wolfgang Lucht;Tim T. Rademacher;Rozenn Keribin

  • Evidence for a weakening relationship between interannual temperature variability and northern vegetation activity

    Shilong Piao;Shilong Piao;Huijuan Nan;Chris Huntingford;Philippe Ciais

  • Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands

    David J. Beerling;Euripides P. Kantzas;Mark R. Lomas;Peter Wade

  • Global climate and the distribution of plant biomes.

    F. I. Woodward;M. R. Lomas;C. K. Kelly

  • Simulated resilience of tropical rainforests to CO2-induced climate change

    Chris Huntingford;Przemyslaw Zelazowski;David Galbraith;David Galbraith;Lina M. Mercado

  • Vegetation dynamics--simulating responses to climatic change

    F. I. Woodward;M. R. Lomas

  • Water-use efficiency and transpiration across European forests during the Anthropocene

    D. C. Frank;B. Poulter;M. Saurer;J. Esper

  • Enhanced weathering strategies for stabilizing climate and averting ocean acidification

    Lyla L. Taylor;Joe Quirk;Rachel M S Thorley;Pushker A. Kharecha;Pushker A. Kharecha

  • FLUXNET and modelling the global carbon cycle

    Andrew D. Friend;Almut Arneth;Nancy Y. Kiang;Mark Lomas

  • The European Space Agency BIOMASS mission: Measuring forest above-ground biomass from space

    Shaun Quegan;Thuy Le Toan;Jerome Chave;Jorgen Dall

  • Increased yield and CO2 sequestration potential with the C4 cereal Sorghum bicolor cultivated in basaltic rock dust-amended agricultural soil.

    Mike E. Kelland;Peter W. Wade;Amy L. Lewis;Lyla L. Taylor

  • On the nature of methane gas-hydrate dissociation during the Toarcian and Aptian Oceanic anoxic events

    David J. Beerling;M. R. Lomas;Darren R. Gröcke

  • Multisectoral climate impact hotspots in a warming world

    Franziska Piontek;Christoph Müller;Thomas A.M. Pugh;Douglas B. Clark

  • Enhanced Weathering Strategies for Stabilizing Climate and Averting Ocean Acidification - Supplementary Information

    Lyla L. Taylor;Joe Quirk;Rachel M. S. Thorley;Pushker A. Kharecha

Frequent Co-Authors

Shaun Quegan
Shaun Quegan University of Sheffield
Stephen Sitch
Stephen Sitch University of Exeter
Andrew D. Friend
Andrew D. Friend University of Cambridge
Chris Huntingford
Chris Huntingford Natural Environment Research Council
F. I. Woodward
F. I. Woodward University of Sheffield
David J. Beerling
David J. Beerling University of Sheffield
F. Ian Woodward
F. Ian Woodward University of Sheffield
Nicolas Viovy
Nicolas Viovy French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA)
Peter E. Levy
Peter E. Levy University of Edinburgh
Douglas B. Clark
Douglas B. Clark UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology

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 opens up diverse career options, many of which benefit from complementary online degrees. For example, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) skills are essential for environmental data analysis and mapping. Students interested in this can find top programs by exploring the best gis undergraduate programs, which offer strong foundations in spatial technologies.

Public administration is another key field for those seeking to influence environmental policy and resource management. Earning a degree through one of the best online mpa programs enables professionals to develop leadership skills and understand regulatory frameworks that shape sustainability initiatives.

Environmental issues often intersect with social dynamics, making sociology a valuable discipline. An online bachelors in sociology can equip learners to analyze human-environment interactions and support community-based environmental projects.

For those pursuing advanced scholarship or leadership roles, flexible doctoral options are available. Some students may prefer streamlined options, such as online doctoral programs without dissertation requirement, which allow professionals to focus on coursework and applied research without the traditional dissertation process.

Best Scientists Citing Mark R. Lomas

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles