| Discipline name | D-Index | World Ranking | Current World Ranking | National Ranking | Current National Ranking | Publications | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental Sciences | 59 | 3103 | 2969 | 37 | 37 | 293 | 12472 |
The chart shows the history of publications by Peter Fantke between 2009 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Peter Fantke published across 18 years, from 2009 to 2026, averaging 19.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 38 publications in 2022. 24 of the 344 publications appeared in the last two years.
344 publications in total across all disciplines
| Year | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 3 |
| 2010 | 1 |
| 2011 | 4 |
| 2012 | 6 |
| 2013 | 6 |
| 2014 | 16 |
| 2015 | 22 |
| 2016 | 29 |
| 2017 | 36 |
| 2018 | 30 |
| 2019 | 37 |
| 2020 | 22 |
| 2021 | 27 |
| 2022 | 38 |
| 2023 | 21 |
| 2024 | 22 |
| 2025 | 14 |
| 2026 | 10 |
| Total | 344 |
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 Peter Fantke sits on this spectrum.
This scientist: 293 publications — 85th percentile
85% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.
The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.
| Publications | Scientists | This scientist |
|---|---|---|
| 41–50 | 21 | |
| 51–60 | 62 | |
| 61–70 | 133 | |
| 71–80 | 257 | |
| 81–90 | 361 | |
| 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 | 293 |
| 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 |
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 Peter Fantke sits on this spectrum.
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 126 D-Index or more.
| 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 | |
| 48 | 272 | |
| 49 | 273 | |
| 50 | 263 | |
| 51 | 232 | |
| 52 | 266 | |
| 53 | 217 | |
| 54 | 198 | |
| 55 | 177 | |
| 56 | 202 | |
| 57 | 204 | |
| 58 | 166 | |
| 59 | 177 | 59 |
| 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 |
Peter Fantke is affiliated with the Technical University of Denmark in Denmark. Their primary field of study is Environmental Science, with a particular focus on health, toxicology, and mutagenesis. Additional subfields include pollution, plant science, environmental engineering, and industrial and manufacturing engineering.
Fantke's recent work encompasses a range of topics related to environmental impact and sustainability, pesticide and herbicide environmental studies, air quality and health impacts, pesticide residue analysis and safety, effects and risks of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, recycling and waste management techniques, and pesticide exposure and toxicity.
Frequent coauthors collaborating with Fantke include Olivier Jolliet, Nicolò Aurisano, Lei Huang, Natalie von Goetz, and Michael Zwicky Hauschild.
Their publications often appear in prominent academic venues, such as:
Selected recent papers authored or coauthored by Fantke include:
Cécile Bulle;Cécile Bulle;Manuele Margni;Laure Patouillard;Laure Patouillard;Anne-Marie Boulay
Peter Fantke;Ronnie Juraske
Unknown
Veronica Mpode Ngole-Jeme;Peter Fantke
Peter Fantke;Rainer Friedrich;Olivier Jolliet
Francesca Verones;Jane Bare;Cecile Bulle;Rolf Frischknecht
Peter Fantke;Brenda W. Gillespie;Ronnie Juraske;Olivier Jolliet
Francesca Verones;Stefanie Hellweg;Assumpció Antón;Ligia B. Azevedo;Ligia B. Azevedo
Peter Fantke;Olivier Jolliet;Olivier Jolliet
Ólafur Ögmundarson;Ólafur Ögmundarson;Markus J. Herrgård;Jochen Forster;Michael Zwicky Hauschild
Peter Fantke;Raphaël Charles;Luiz Felippe de Alencastro;Rainer Friedrich
Olivier Jolliet;Assumpció Antón;Anne-Marie Boulay;Anne-Marie Boulay;Francesco Cherubini
Nicolò Aurisano;Lei Huang;Llorenç Milà i Canals;Olivier Jolliet
Peter Fantke;Ronnie Juraske;Assumpció Antón;Rainer Friedrich
Caroline L. Ring;Caroline L. Ring;Jon A. Arnot;Deborah H Bennett;Peter P. Egeghy
Peter Fantke;Peter Wieland;Cédric Wannaz;Rainer Friedrich
R.E. Jacobsen;Peter Fantke;Stefan Trapp
Didier Beloin-Saint-Pierre;Ariane Christine Albers;Arnaud Helias;Ligia Tiruta-Barna
Rolf Frischknecht;Peter Fantke;Laura Tschümperlin;Monia Niero
Peter Fantke;Marian Bijster;Cécile Guignard;Michael Zwicky Hauschild
Natasha Hodas;Natasha Hodas;Miranda Loh;Hyeong-Moo Shin;Dingsheng Li
Thomas Sonderegger;Jo Dewulf;Peter Fantke;Danielle Maia de Souza;Danielle Maia de Souza;Danielle Maia de Souza
Olivier Jolliet;Alexi S. Ernstoff;Susan A. Csiszar;Peter Fantke
If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.
For those interested in advancing their expertise in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open diverse career pathways. Educational professionals might consider transitioning from an EdS to EdD program to deepen their leadership skills without committing to lengthy dissertations. Programs like these offer practical, research-based learning tailored for sustainability educators and policy advocates.
Social work also intersects with environmental issues, especially in community resilience and environmental justice. Pursuing online DSW programs in social work can equip professionals to address the social dimensions of environmental challenges, fostering stronger connections between communities and ecological health.
Alternatively, enrolling in the most affordable online general studies degree programs can provide students with a flexible foundation, allowing them to tailor their studies towards environmental topics without the financial burden often associated with higher education.
For educators aiming to enhance their credentials in environmental education, exploring online EdD programs no dissertation options can be a convenient pathway that balances academic rigor with practical application. Each of these pathways leverages flexible online learning to help students and professionals align their education with evolving environmental career demands.
Learn more about these options: online edd programs no dissertation, eds to edd program, online dsw programs in social work, and most affordable online general studies degree programs.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Corning (United States)
SRM Institute of Science and Technology Private university in Chennai, India
University of Pennsylvania
University of Münster
University of Franche-Comté
Loyola University Chicago
Technical University of Munich
University of Aveiro
Keio University
University of Georgia
Syracuse University
Bank for International Settlements
National Institutes of Health
Pompeu Fabra University
University of St. Gallen
