World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
35
Citations
5059
World Ranking
9303
National Ranking
3336

Natalie A. Griffiths 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 Natalie A. Griffiths 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: 150 publications — 41st percentile

41% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Natalie A. Griffiths 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 Natalie A. Griffiths 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: 35 D-Index — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Natalie A. Griffiths is affiliated with Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the United States. Their research is primarily situated within the field of Environmental Science, with a strong emphasis on Ecology, Water Science and Technology, and Global and Planetary Change. Additional focus areas include Environmental Chemistry and Plant Science.

The body of work by Natalie A. Griffiths addresses a range of topics related to ecosystem dynamics and biogeochemical processes. Main topics covered in their research include:

  • Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology
  • Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
  • Coastal Wetland Ecosystem Dynamics
  • Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
  • Botany and Plant Ecology Studies
  • Water-Energy-Food Nexus Studies

Several notable recent papers exemplify their research focus:

  • Rapid Net Carbon Loss From a Whole-Ecosystem Warmed Peatland, 2020, AGU Advances
  • Soil metabolome response to whole-ecosystem warming at the Spruce and Peatland Responses under Changing Environments experiment, 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Experimental nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment stimulates multiple trophic levels of algal and detrital-based food webs: a global meta-analysis from streams and rivers, 2020, Biological Reviews/Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society
  • Anthropogenically driven climate and landscape change effects on inland water carbon dynamics: What have we learned and where are we going?, 2022, Global Change Biology
  • An Integrative Model for Soil Biogeochemistry and Methane Processes: I. Model Structure and Sensitivity Analysis, 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Griffiths include:

  • Stephen D. Sebestyen
  • Rachel M. Pilla
  • Paul J. Hanson
  • Randall K. Kolka
  • Paul G. Matson

Griffiths' work is regularly published in several key scientific venues, reflecting the breadth of their research interests. Frequent publication venues include:

  • Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)
  • Ecosystems
  • Hydrological Processes
  • Biogeochemistry

Best Publications

  • A review of allochthonous organic matter dynamics and metabolism in streams

    Jennifer L. Tank;Emma J. Rosi-Marshall;Natalie A. Griffiths;Sally A. Entrekin

  • Toxins in transgenic crop byproducts may affect headwater stream ecosystems

    E. J. Rosi-Marshall;J. L. Tank;T. V. Royer;M. R. Whiles

  • Stability of peatland carbon to rising temperatures

    Rachel Wilson;Anya Hopple;Malak Tfaily;Stephen Sebestyen

  • Global patterns and drivers of ecosystem functioning in rivers and riparian zones

    Scott D. Tiegs;David M. Costello;Mark W. Isken;Guy Woodward

  • Forecasting functional implications of global changes in riparian plant communities

    John S Kominoski;John S Kominoski;Jennifer J Follstad Shah;Jennifer J Follstad Shah;Cristina Canhoto;Dylan G Fischer

  • Global synthesis of the temperature sensitivity of leaf litter breakdown in streams and rivers

    Jennifer J. Follstad Shah;Jennifer J. Follstad Shah;John S. Kominoski;Marcelo Ardón;Walter K. Dodds

  • A standardized cotton-strip assay for measuring organic-matter decomposition in streams

    Scott D. Tiegs;Joanne E. Clapcott;Natalie A. Griffiths;Andrew J. Boulton

  • Occurrence of maize detritus and a transgenic insecticidal protein (Cry1Ab) within the stream network of an agricultural landscape

    Jennifer L. Tank;Emma J. Rosi-Marshall;Todd V. Royer;Matt R. Whiles

  • Partitioning assimilatory nitrogen uptake in streams: an analysis of stable isotope tracer additions across continents

    J. L. Tank;E. Martí;T. Riis;D. von Schiller

  • Agricultural land use alters the seasonality and magnitude of stream metabolism

    Natalie A. Griffiths;Jennifer L. Tank;Todd V. Royer;Sarah S. Roley

  • Responses of stream macroinvertebrates to Bt maize leaf detritus.

    Catherine P. Chambers;Matt R. Whiles;Emma J. Rosi-Marshall;Jennifer L. Tank

  • Rapid Net Carbon Loss From a Whole‐Ecosystem Warmed Peatland

    Paul Hanson;Natalie Griffiths;Colleen Iversen;Richard Norby

  • Representing northern peatland microtopography and hydrology within the Community Land Model

    Xiaoying Shi;Peter E. Thornton;Daniel M. Ricciuto;Paul J. Hanson

  • Rapid decomposition of maize detritus in agricultural headwater streams

    Natalie A. Griffiths;Jennifer L. Tank;Todd V. Royer;Emma J. Rosi-Marshall

  • Anthropogenically driven climate and landscape change effects on inland water carbon dynamics: What have we learned and where are we going?

    Unknown

  • The metabolic regimes of 356 rivers in the United States.

    Alison P. Appling;Jordan S. Read;Luke A. Winslow;Maite Arroita;Maite Arroita

  • Soil metabolome response to whole-ecosystem warming at the Spruce and Peatland Responses under Changing Environments experiment.

    Rachel M. Wilson;Malak M. Tfaily;Malak M. Tfaily;Max Kolton;Eric R. Johnston

  • Multimetric spatial optimization of switchgrass plantings across a watershed

    Esther S. Parish;Michael R. Hilliard;Latha M. Baskaran;Virginia H. Dale

  • The influence of floodplain restoration on whole-stream metabolism in an agricultural stream: insights from a 5-year continuous data set

    Sarah S. Roley;Sarah S. Roley;Jennifer L. Tank;Natalie A. Griffiths;Natalie A. Griffiths;Robert O. Hall

  • Where does streamwater come from in low-relief forested watersheds? A dual-isotope approach

    J. Klaus;J. J. McDonnell;J. J. McDonnell;C. R. Jackson;E. Du

  • Temporal variation in organic carbon spiraling in Midwestern agricultural streams

    Natalie A. Griffiths;Natalie A. Griffiths;Jennifer L. Tank;Todd V. Royer;Thomas J. Warrner

  • Experimental nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment stimulates multiple trophic levels of algal and detrital-based food webs: a global meta-analysis from streams and rivers

    Marcelo Ardón;Lydia H Zeglin;Ryan M Utz;Scott D Cooper

Frequent Co-Authors

Stephen D. Sebestyen
Stephen D. Sebestyen US Forest Service
Paul J. Hanson
Paul J. Hanson Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Daniel M. Ricciuto
Daniel M. Ricciuto Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Jennifer L. Tank
Jennifer L. Tank University of Notre Dame
Jeffrey J. McDonnell
Jeffrey J. McDonnell University of Saskatchewan
Jeffrey M. Warren
Jeffrey M. Warren Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Matt R. Whiles
Matt R. Whiles University of Florida
Richard J. Norby
Richard J. Norby University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Todd V. Royer
Todd V. Royer Indiana University
Emma J. Rosi-Marshall
Emma J. Rosi-Marshall Loyola University Chicago

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 those interested in Environmental Sciences, exploring accredited affordable online general studies degree options can provide a flexible, budget-friendly foundation. These degrees offer a broad education base that complements specialized environmental knowledge.

Many prospective students seek an easy bachelor's degree pathway to balance studies with work or personal commitments, which online environmental programs can effectively accommodate with their varied course structures and pacing.

Specializing in areas like geology through geology degrees online allows learners to understand earth processes crucial for tackling environmental challenges. These programs often offer hands-on virtual labs and fieldwork components.

Additionally, pursuing the best gis programs can equip students with essential skills to analyze environmental data and support sustainable management practices. GIS expertise is increasingly valuable in environmental consulting, conservation, and urban planning careers.

Best Scientists Citing Natalie A. Griffiths

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles