World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
60
Citations
40072
World Ranking
3751
National Ranking
324

Paul Lingor publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Paul Lingor sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 194 publications — 60th percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

Paul Lingor D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Paul Lingor sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 60 D-Index — 61st percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

    Daniel J. Klionsky;Amal Kamal Abdel-Aziz;Sara Abdelfatah;Mahmoud Abdellatif

  • Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

    Daniel J. Klionsky;Fabio C. Abdalla;Hagai Abeliovich;Robert T. Abraham

  • Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    Daniel J. Klionsky;Kotb Abdelmohsen;Akihisa Abe;Joynal Abedin

  • Graph theoretical analysis of magnetoencephalographic functional connectivity in Alzheimer's disease.

    C. J. Stam;W. de Haan;A. Daffertshofer;B. F. Jones

  • Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    Daniel J. Klionsky;Kotb Abdelmohsen;Akihisa Abe;Joynal Abedin

  • Mechanisms of acute axonal degeneration in the optic nerve in vivo

    Johanna Knöferle;Jan C. Koch;Thomas Ostendorf;Uwe Michel

  • Nusinersen in adults with 5q spinal muscular atrophy: a non-interventional, multicentre, observational cohort study

    Tim Hagenacker;Claudia D Wurster;René Günther;René Günther;Olivia Schreiber-Katz

  • ROCK inhibition and CNTF interact on intrinsic signalling pathways and differentially regulate survival and regeneration in retinal ganglion cells

    Paul Lingor;Lars Tönges;Nicole Pieper;Christina Bermel

  • Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

    Daniel J. Klionsky;Kotb Abdelmohsen;Akihisa Abe;Joynal Abedin

  • Inhibition of Rho kinase (ROCK) increases neurite outgrowth on chondroitin sulphate proteoglycan in vitro and axonal regeneration in the adult optic nerve in vivo

    Paul Lingor;Nicole Teusch;Katrin Schwarz;Reinhold Mueller

  • Hot-spot KIF5A mutations cause familial ALS

    David Brenner;Rüstem Yilmaz;Kathrin Müller;Torsten Grehl

  • ROCK inhibition in models of neurodegeneration and its potential for clinical translation.

    Jan Christoph Koch;Lars Tatenhorst;Anna-Elisa Roser;Kim-Ann Saal

  • Inhibition of rho kinase enhances survival of dopaminergic neurons and attenuates axonal loss in a mouse model of Parkinson’s disease

    Lars Tönges;Tobias Frank;Lars Tatenhorst;Kim A Saal

  • ROCK2 is a major regulator of axonal degeneration, neuronal death and axonal regeneration in the CNS

    J C Koch;L Tönges;E Barski;U Michel

  • Growth/Differentiation Factor-15/Macrophage Inhibitory Cytokine-1 Is a Novel Trophic Factor for Midbrain Dopaminergic Neurons In Vivo

    Jens Strelau;Aideen Sullivan;Martina Böttner;Paul Lingor

  • Dopamine and performance in a reinforcement learning task: evidence from Parkinson's disease.

    Tamara Shiner;Ben Seymour;Klaus Wunderlich;Ciaran Hill

  • Elevated α-synuclein caused by SNCA gene triplication impairs neuronal differentiation and maturation in Parkinson's patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells.

    L M A Oliveira;L J Falomir-Lockhart;M G Botelho;K-H Lin

  • Differential transgene expression in brain cells in vivo and in vitro from AAV-2 vectors with small transcriptional control units.

    S Kügler;P Lingor;U Schöll;S Zolotukhin

  • The Spinal Muscular Atrophy disease protein SMN is linked to the Rho-kinase pathway via profilin

    Anna Nölle;Andre Zeug;Jeroen van Bergeijk;Lars Tönges

  • Fasudil attenuates aggregation of α-synuclein in models of Parkinson’s disease

    Lars Tatenhorst;Katrin Eckermann;Vivian Dambeck;Luis Fonseca-Ornelas

  • Axonal degeneration as a therapeutic target in the CNS

    Paul Lingor;Jan C. Koch;Lars Tönges;Mathias Bähr

Frequent Co-Authors

Mathias Bähr
Mathias Bähr University of Göttingen
Albert C. Ludolph
Albert C. Ludolph University of Ulm
Inga Zerr
Inga Zerr University of Göttingen
Tiago F. Outeiro
Tiago F. Outeiro University of Göttingen
Sergio Lavandero
Sergio Lavandero University of Chile
Günter U. Höglinger
Günter U. Höglinger Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
Thomas Klopstock
Thomas Klopstock Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Evelina Gatti
Evelina Gatti Aix-Marseille University
Rejko Krüger
Rejko Krüger University of Luxembourg
Boris Zhivotovsky
Boris Zhivotovsky Karolinska Institute

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 neuroscience, a variety of related online degrees open new career pathways in mental health and behavioral sciences. Those considering social work as a bridge to clinical neuropsychology often explore options such as msw programs. These accelerated online MSW degrees can prepare you for roles supporting individuals and communities through evidence-based interventions.

If you’re interested in foundational psychological knowledge, the fastest online psychology degree programs let you quickly gain skills that are directly relevant in research, healthcare, or education.

For students passionate about guidance and mental health in educational settings, the university of the cumberlands school counseling program is an affordable online path with CACREP accreditation. Additionally, those seeking flexibility and value should consider affordable online masters counseling programs, which open the door to professional licensure and advanced practice.

These diverse online degrees can complement your neuroscience background, leading to meaningful work in healthcare, education, and beyond.

Best Scientists Citing Paul Lingor

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles