World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
55
Citations
12006
World Ranking
3827
National Ranking
1463

Nan Rosenbloom 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 Nan Rosenbloom 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: 152 publications — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nan Rosenbloom 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 Nan Rosenbloom 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: 55 D-Index — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Nan Rosenbloom is affiliated with the National Center for Atmospheric Research in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the Earth and Planetary Sciences and Environmental Science, with extensive contributions to the understanding of global and planetary change and atmospheric science.

They have published widely on topics including climate variability and models, meteorological phenomena and simulations, oceanographic and atmospheric processes, atmospheric and environmental gas dynamics, tropical and extratropical cyclones research, geology and paleoclimatology research, and marine and coastal ecosystems.

Their recent papers cover a range of subjects within climate science and modeling. Notable works include:

  • Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6, 2021, Earth System Dynamics
  • Ubiquity of human-induced changes in climate variability, 2021, Earth System Dynamics
  • An Unprecedented Set of High-Resolution Earth System Simulations for Understanding Multiscale Interactions in Climate Variability and Change, 2020, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
  • Projected Future Changes in Tropical Cyclones Using the CMIP6 HighResMIP Multimodel Ensemble, 2020, Geophysical Research Letters
  • Constraining human contributions to observed warming since the pre-industrial period, 2021, Nature Climate Change

Nan Rosenbloom frequently collaborates with several other researchers in the field. Frequent co-authors include Gerald A. Meehl, Gökhan Danabasoglu, Stephen Yeager, Aixue Hu, and John Fasullo.

Their research has been published in a variety of scientific journals, with multiple contributions to the following venues:

  • Journal of Climate
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
  • Geophysical Research Letters
  • Earth System Dynamics
  • Nature Geoscience

Best Publications

  • Contribution of increasing CO2 and climate to carbon storage by ecosystems in the United States

    David S. Schimel;Jerry M. Melillo;Hanqin Tian;A. D. McGuire

  • Influence of carbon‐nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO2 fertilization and climate variability

    Peter E. Thornton;Jean-François Lamarque;Nan A. Rosenbloom;Natalie M. Mahowald

  • Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6

    Claudia Tebaldi;Kevin Debeire;Veronika Eyring;Veronika Eyring;Erich Fischer

  • Climate Variability and Change since 850 CE: An Ensemble Approach with the Community Earth System Model

    Bette L. Otto-Bliesner;Esther C. Brady;John Fasullo;Alexandra Jahn

  • Ecosystem model spin-up: Estimating steady state conditions in a coupled terrestrial carbon and nitrogen cycle model

    Peter E. Thornton;Nan A. Rosenbloom

  • Large-scale features of Pliocene climate: results from the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project

    Alan Haywood;Daniel Hill;Daniel Hill;Aisling Dolan;Bette Otto-Bliesner

  • Hillslope and channel evolution in a marine terraced landscape, Santa Cruz, California

    Nan A. Rosenbloom;Robert S. Anderson

  • An Unprecedented Set of High-Resolution Earth System Simulations for Understanding Multiscale Interactions in Climate Variability and Change

    Ping Chang;Shaoqing Zhang;Shaoqing Zhang;Gokhan Danabasoglu;Gokhan Danabasoglu;Stephen G. Yeager;Stephen G. Yeager

  • Last Millennium Climate and Its Variability in CCSM4

    Laura Landrum;Bette L. Otto-Bliesner;Eugene R. Wahl;Andrew Conley

  • Predicting near-term changes in the Earth System: A large ensemble of initialized decadal prediction simulations using the Community Earth System Model

    S. G. Yeager;G. Danabasoglu;N. A. Rosenbloom;W. Strand

  • Projected Future Changes in Tropical Cyclones Using the CMIP6 HighResMIP Multimodel Ensemble.

    Malcolm John Roberts;Joanne Camp;Jon Seddon;Pier Luigi Vidale

  • Sensitivity to glacial forcing in the CCSM4

    Esther C. Brady;Bette L. Otto-Bliesner;Jennifer E. Kay;Nan Rosenbloom

  • Constraining human contributions to observed warming since the pre-industrial period

    Nathan P. Gillett;Megan Kirchmeier-Young;Aurélien Ribes;Hideo Shiogama

  • How warm was the last interglacial? New model-data comparisons

    Bette L. Otto-Bliesner;Nan Rosenbloom;Emma J. Stone;Nicholas P. McKay

  • Assessing confidence in Pliocene sea surface temperatures to evaluate predictive models

    Harry J. Dowsett;Marci M. Robinson;Alan M. Haywood;Daniel J. Hill;Daniel J. Hill

  • Projected changes in tropical cyclone activity under future warming scenarios using a high-resolution climate model

    Julio T. Bacmeister;Kevin A. Reed;Cecile Hannay;Peter Lawrence

  • The VEMAP integrated database for modelling United States ecosystem/vegetation sensitivity to climate change

    G. Kittel;Nan Rosenbloom;H. Painter;S. Schimel

  • Influence of Bering Strait flow and North Atlantic circulation on glacial sea-level changes

    Aixue Hu;Gerald A. Meehl;Bette L. Otto-Bliesner;Claire Waelbroeck

  • Initialized Earth System prediction from subseasonal to decadal timescales

    Gerald A. Meehl;Jadwiga H. Richter;Haiyan Teng;Antonietta Capotondi;Antonietta Capotondi

  • Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP): experimental design and boundary conditions (Experiment 1)

    Alan Haywood;Harry Dowsett;Bette Otto-Bliesner;Mark Chandler;Mark Chandler

  • A multi-model assessment of last interglacial temperatures

    Daniel J Lunt;A Abe-Ouchi;P Bakker;A Berger

  • Causes of early Holocene desertification in arid central Asia

    Liya Jin;Liya Jin;Fahu Chen;Carrie Morrill;Carrie Morrill;Bette L. Otto-Bliesner

Frequent Co-Authors

Bette L. Otto-Bliesner
Bette L. Otto-Bliesner National Center for Atmospheric Research
Ayako Abe-Ouchi
Ayako Abe-Ouchi University of Tokyo
David S. Schimel
David S. Schimel Jet Propulsion Lab
Timothy G. F. Kittel
Timothy G. F. Kittel University of Colorado Boulder
Zhongshi Zhang
Zhongshi Zhang NORCE Research
Alan M. Haywood
Alan M. Haywood University of Leeds
Daniel J. Hill
Daniel J. Hill University of Leeds
Daniel J. Lunt
Daniel J. Lunt University of Bristol
Christopher Daly
Christopher Daly Oregon State University
Mark A. Chandler
Mark A. Chandler Columbia 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 fields that enhance their expertise and career options. For those interested in understanding Earth's physical structure and processes, pursuing an online geoscience degree offers specialized knowledge in geology, minerals, and natural resource management.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is another critical area for environmental professionals. Skills in spatial data analysis and mapping technologies are highly valued in conservation and urban planning roles. Students can advance their GIS capabilities through the best GIS programs available online, combining technical expertise with environmental applications.

For those aiming to take leadership or policy-making roles, an online Master of Public Administration can be a strategic choice. Accessible through some of the easiest online MPA programs, this path provides skills in management, governance, and public policy relevant to environmental agencies and non-profits.

Understanding social dynamics is also essential in addressing environmental challenges. An online bachelors degree programs in sociology can prepare students to analyze human behavior, community impact, and social justice issues within environmental contexts.

Best Scientists Citing Nan Rosenbloom

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles