World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
59
Citations
22424
World Ranking
3018
National Ranking
238

Mark Williams 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 Williams 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: 353 publications — 91st percentile

91% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mark Williams 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 Williams 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: 59 D-Index — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mark Williams is affiliated with the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom and has a robust research portfolio primarily focused on Earth and Planetary Sciences as well as Environmental Science. Their scholarly work encompasses several interconnected subfields, including Paleontology, Atmospheric Science, Oceanography, Global and Planetary Change, and Ecology.

The scientist's main topics of research focus on Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils, Geology and Paleoclimatology Research, Marine Biology and Ecology Research, Global Energy and Sustainability Research, Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology, Geological and Geophysical Studies, and Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics.

Mark Williams's recent publications illustrate their ongoing engagement with contemporary issues concerning the Anthropocene epoch and human impacts on geological and environmental systems. Notable recent papers include:

  • Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch, 2020, Communications Earth & Environment
  • The Anthropocene: Comparing Its Meaning in Geology (Chronostratigraphy) with Conceptual Approaches Arising in Other Disciplines, 2021, Earth's Future
  • Epochs, events and episodes: Marking the geological impact of humans, 2022, Earth-Science Reviews
  • The proposed Anthropocene Epoch/Series is underpinned by an extensive array of mid-20th century stratigraphic event signals, 2022, Journal of Quaternary Science
  • The Anthropocene is a prospective epoch/series, not a geological event, 2022, Episodes

Throughout their career, Williams has collaborated frequently with a network of scientists that includes Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N. Waters, Colin Summerhayes, Martin J. Head, and Alejandro Cearreta, reflecting interdisciplinary and cross-institutional research partnerships.

The scientist has contributed to multiple publication venues, with significant numbers of papers appearing in:

  • Palaeontologia Electronica
  • Earth-Science Reviews
  • International Journal of Food Science & Technology
  • The Anthropocene Review
  • Paleontological Research

In addition to journal articles, Mark Williams has also published a scholarly book titled Altered Earth (2022) through Cambridge University Press, contributing to academic discourse on environmental and geological changes.

Best Publications

  • The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene

    Colin N. Waters;Jan Zalasiewicz;Colin Summerhayes;Anthony D. Barnosky

  • The Anthropocene: From Global Change to Planetary Stewardship

    Will Steffen;Will Steffen;Asa Persson;Asa Persson;Lisa Deutsch;J Zalasiewicz

  • The new world of the Anthropocene

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Will Steffen;Paul Crutzen

  • The Anthropocene: a new epoch of geological time?

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Mark Williams;Alan Haywood;Michael Ellis

  • When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Colin N. Waters;Mark Williams;Anthony D. Barnosky

  • The geological cycle of plastics and their use as a stratigraphic indicator of the Anthropocene

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Colin N. Waters;Juliana A. Ivar do Sul;Patricia L. Corcoran

  • Are we now living in the Anthropocene

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Alan Smith;Tiffany L. Barry

  • The Working Group on the Anthropocene: Summary of evidence and interim recommendations

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Colin N. Waters;Colin N. Waters;Colin P. Summerhayes;Alexander P. Wolfe

  • Deep-time Perspectives on Climate Change: Marrying the Signal from Computer Models and Biological Proxies

    M Williams;AM Haywood;FJ Gregory;Daniela N Schmidt

  • Mid-Miocene cooling and the extinction of tundra in continental Antarctica

    Adam R. Lewis;David R. Marchant;Allan C. Ashworth;Lars Hedenäs

  • Satellite-Observed Characteristics of Winter Monsoon Cloud Clusters

    Mark Williams;Robert A. Houze

  • Scale and diversity of the physical technosphere: A geological perspective:

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Colin N. Waters;Colin N. Waters;Anthony D. Barnosky

  • The PRISM3D paleoenvironmental reconstruction

    Harry Dowsett;Marci Robinson;Alan Haywood;Ulrich Salzmann

  • The technofossil record of humans

    Jan Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Colin N Waters;Anthony D Barnosky;Anthony D Barnosky

  • Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene

    Will Steffen;Will Steffen;Reinhold Leinfelder;Jan Zalasiewicz;Colin N. Waters

  • Stratigraphy of the Anthropocene

    J Zalasiewicz;M Williams;R Fortey;Alan Smith

  • Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch

    Jaia Syvitski;Colin N. Waters;John Day;John D. Milliman

  • The Anthropocene biosphere

    Mark Williams;Jan Zalasiewicz;PK Haff;Christian Schwägerl

  • WATER AND MINING CONFLICTS IN PERU

    Anthony Bebbington;Mark Williams

  • A stratigraphical basis for the Anthropocene

    Colin N. Waters;Jan A. Zalasiewicz;Mark Williams;Michael A. Ellis

  • Graptolites in British stratigraphy

    J. A. Zalasiewicz;L. Taylor;A. W. A. Rushton;D. K. Loydell

Frequent Co-Authors

Jan Zalasiewicz
Jan Zalasiewicz University of Leicester
David J. Siveter
David J. Siveter University of Leicester
Colin N. Waters
Colin N. Waters University of Leicester
Derek J. Siveter
Derek J. Siveter University of Oxford
Alan M. Haywood
Alan M. Haywood University of Leeds
Melanie J. Leng
Melanie J. Leng University of Nottingham
Will Steffen
Will Steffen Australian National University
Richard J. Aldridge
Richard J. Aldridge University of Leicester
Claus-Dieter Hillenbrand
Claus-Dieter Hillenbrand British Antarctic Survey
Colin Summerhayes
Colin Summerhayes University of Cambridge

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

For students interested in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can broaden career opportunities. A best online geology degree provides foundational knowledge of Earth's processes, critical for roles in environmental consulting and natural resource management.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) skills are increasingly valuable in environmental analysis and planning. Enrolling in top GIS masters programs enables professionals to leverage spatial data for sustainability projects and disaster response strategies.

Understanding public policy and administration also benefits those seeking leadership roles in environmental agencies. Completing one of the top online MPA programs equips graduates with skills to influence environmental legislation and manage community initiatives effectively.

Additionally, sociological perspectives are crucial for addressing environmental justice and community impact issues. Earning an accredited online bachelors in sociology helps students analyze human behavior and social systems in relation to environmental challenges.

Best Scientists Citing Mark Williams

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles