World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

Philip Jordan publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Philip Jordan between 2001 and 2021, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Philip Jordan published across 21 years, from 2001 to 2021, averaging 4.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 12 publications in 2012. 9 of the 95 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2001 to 2021. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 12. Peak 12 publications in 2012. 2001: 1 publication 2002: 2 publications 2003: 3 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 3 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 7 publications 2008: 2 publications 2009: 6 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 8 publications 2012: 12 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 7 publications 2016: 3 publications 2017: 3 publications 2018: 3 publications 2019: 0 publications 2020: 4 publications 2021: 5 publications
2001 2021

95 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Philip Jordan: publications per year, 2001 to 2021
Year Publications
2001 1
2002 2
2003 3
2004 1
2005 3
2006 3
2007 7
2008 2
2009 6
2010 5
2011 8
2012 12
2013 10
2014 7
2015 7
2016 3
2017 3
2018 3
2019 0
2020 4
2021 5
Total 95
Download as CSV

Philip Jordan 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 Philip Jordan sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 66 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 41–50 to 690+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 617. Most scientists, 617, have 121–130 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more. 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: 282 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: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 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 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41–50 publications 690+

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists
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
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
Download as CSV

Philip Jordan 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 Philip Jordan sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 126+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 348. Most scientists, 348, have 45 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more. 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: 198 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: 20 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: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Environmental Sciences scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,676 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists
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
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
Download as CSV

Overview

What is he best known for?

The fields of study he is best known for:

  • Agriculture
  • Ecology
  • Statistics

His scientific interests lie mostly in Hydrology, Eutrophication, Surface runoff, Water Framework Directive and Water quality. In his work, Soil type and Soil conditioner is strongly intertwined with Soil test, which is a subfield of Hydrology. His research in Surface runoff intersects with topics in Soil water and Hydrology.

His Soil water research includes themes of Groundwater recharge and Drainage. His Water Framework Directive study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Agriculture and Agricultural land. His research in the fields of Nutrient pollution overlaps with other disciplines such as Function.

His most cited work include:

  • Characterising phosphorus transfers in rural catchments using a continuous bank-side analyser (158 citations)
  • Limitations of instantaneous water quality sampling in surface-water catchments: Comparison with near-continuous phosphorus time-series data (151 citations)
  • Evaluating the success of phosphorus management from field to watershed. (112 citations)

What are the main themes of his work throughout his whole career to date?

Philip Jordan mostly deals with Hydrology, Water quality, Drainage basin, Agriculture and Eutrophication. His biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Soil water and Arable land. His Water Framework Directive study, which is part of a larger body of work in Water quality, is frequently linked to European union, bridging the gap between disciplines.

The Drainage basin study which covers Ecology that intersects with Animal science. His Agriculture research is multidisciplinary, incorporating perspectives in Environmental resource management and Water resource management. His Eutrophication research integrates issues from Septic tank and Climate change.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Hydrology (70.45%)
  • Water quality (60.23%)
  • Drainage basin (31.82%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2016-2021)?

  • Water quality (60.23%)
  • Drainage basin (31.82%)
  • Biogeochemical cycle (7.95%)

In recent papers he was focusing on the following fields of study:

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Water quality, Drainage basin, Biogeochemical cycle, Agriculture and Physical geography. His Water quality study integrates concerns from other disciplines, such as Land use and Water resource management. Drainage basin is a subfield of Hydrology that Philip Jordan studies.

He interconnects Sampling, Turbidity and Simple linear regression in the investigation of issues within Hydrology. His Biogeochemical cycle research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Nutrient management, Soil water, Land use, land-use change and forestry and Environmental resource management. He has researched Physical geography in several fields, including Invertebrate and Water Framework Directive.

Between 2016 and 2021, his most popular works were:

  • Challenges of Reducing Phosphorus Based Water Eutrophication in the Agricultural Landscapes of Northwest Europe (54 citations)
  • Effects of agricultural land management changes on surface water quality: A review of meso-scale catchment research (31 citations)
  • Effects of agricultural land management changes on surface water quality: A review of meso-scale catchment research (31 citations)

In his most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Agriculture
  • Ecology
  • Statistics

Drainage basin, Biogeochemical cycle, Water quality, Agriculture and Meso scale are his primary areas of study. The study incorporates disciplines such as Downstream and Pollution in addition to Biogeochemical cycle. His Downstream research incorporates elements of Climate change, Environmental resource management, Land use, land-use change and forestry and Eutrophication.

Philip Jordan has included themes like Climate pattern, Nutrient management, Nutrient and Physical geography in his Pollution study. You can notice a mix of various disciplines of study, such as Water resource management, Surface water quality, Agricultural land and Landscape engineering, in his Meso scale studies.

Best Publications

  • Limitations of instantaneous water quality sampling in surface-water catchments: Comparison with near-continuous phosphorus time-series data

    Rachel Cassidy;P. Jordan

  • Do septic tank systems pose a hidden threat to water quality

    Paul J.A. Withers;Philip Jordan;Linda May;Helen P. Jarvie

  • Characterising phosphorus transfers in rural catchments using a continuous bank-side analyser

    P. Jordan;A. Arnscheidt;H. McGrogan;S. McCormick

  • Evaluating the success of phosphorus management from field to watershed.

    Andrew N. Sharpley;Peter J.A. Kleinman;Philip Jordan;Lars Bergström

  • The seasonality of phosphorus transfers from land to water: implications for trophic impacts and policy evaluation

    Philip Jordan;A.R. Melland;P.-E. Mellander;G. Shortle

  • Patterns and processes of phosphorus transfer from Irish grassland soils to rivers—integration of laboratory and catchment studies

    Philip Jordan;Wayne Menary;Karen Daly;Gerard Kiely

  • A comparison of SWAT, HSPF and SHETRAN/GOPC for modelling phosphorus export from three catchments in Ireland

    Ahmed Elssidig Nasr;Michael Bruen;Phillip Jordan;Richard Moles

  • Challenges of Reducing Phosphorus Based Water Eutrophication in the Agricultural Landscapes of Northwest Europe

    Roland Bol;Gerard Gruau;Per-Erik Mellander;Remi Dupas

  • Quantifying nutrient transfer pathways in agricultural catchments using high temporal resolution data

    Per-Erik Mellander;Alice R. Melland;Philip Jordan;Philip Jordan;David P. Wall

  • Modelling soil phosphorus decline: Expectations of Water Framework Directive policies

    R. P. O. Schulte;A. R. Melland;O. Fenton;M. Herlihy

  • Using the nutrient transfer continuum concept to evaluate the European Union Nitrates Directive National Action Programme

    D. Wall;Philip Jordan;Philip Jordan;A. R. Melland;P. E. Mellander

  • Storm Event Suspended Sediment-Discharge Hysteresis and Controls in Agricultural Watersheds: Implications for Watershed Scale Sediment Management

    Sophie C. Sherriff;Sophie C. Sherriff;John S. Rowan;Owen Fenton;Philip Jordan

  • High-resolution phosphorus transfers at the catchment scale: the hidden importance of non-storm transfers

    Philip Jordan;Joerg Arnscheidt;H McGrogan;S McCormick;S McCormick

  • Effects of agricultural land management changes on surface water quality: A review of meso-scale catchment research

    A.R. Melland;A.R. Melland;O. Fenton;P. Jordan;P. Jordan

  • Defining the sources of low-flow phosphorus transfers in complex catchments.

    Joerg Arnscheidt;Philip Jordan;S. Li;S. McCormick

  • Nutrient emissions to water from septic tank systems in rural catchments: Uncertainties and implications for policy

    P.J.A. Withers;L. May;H.P. Jarvie;Philip Jordan

  • The Irish Agricultural Catchments Programme: catchment selection using spatial multi-criteria decision analysis

    R. M. Fealy;C. Buckley;S. Mechan;A. Melland

  • Time lag: a methodology for the estimation of vertical and horizontal travel and flushing timescales to nitrate threshold concentrations in Irish aquifers

    Owen Fenton;Rogier P.O. Schulte;Philip Jordan;Stanley T.J. Lalor

  • Mobilisation or dilution? Nitrate response of karst springs to high rainfall events

    Manuela Huebsch;Manuela Huebsch;Owen Fenton;Brendan Horan;Deirdre Hennessy

  • Low flow water quality in rivers; septic tank systems and high-resolution phosphorus signals

    Katrina Macintosh;Philip Jordan;Philip Jordan;R. Cassidy;Joerg Arnscheidt

  • Assessing the ecological status of candidate reference lakes in Ireland using palaeolimnology

    Manel Leira;Philip Jordan;David Taylor;Catherine Dalton

Frequent Co-Authors

Per-Erik Mellander
Per-Erik Mellander Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority
Owen Fenton
Owen Fenton Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority
Nicholas M. Holden
Nicholas M. Holden University College Dublin
Karl G. Richards
Karl G. Richards Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority
Helen Bennion
Helen Bennion University College London
Linda May
Linda May Natural Environment Research Council
Rogier P.O. Schulte
Rogier P.O. Schulte Wageningen University & Research
Helen P. Jarvie
Helen P. Jarvie University of Waterloo
Gerard Kiely
Gerard Kiely University College Cork
Brendan Horan
Brendan Horan Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority

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 expanding their expertise related to Environmental Sciences, exploring diverse online degree options can open new career opportunities. Many professionals pursue advanced qualifications, and programs like eds to edd programs online offer a pathway to leadership roles in education and policy development relevant to environmental studies.

Social work intersects with environmental justice, making online dsw programs in social work valuable for those aiming to support communities affected by environmental challenges. Additionally, students seeking a broad foundational knowledge may opt for an accredited affordable online general studies degree, which provides flexibility to combine environmental topics with other disciplines.

For newcomers, selecting one of the easiest bachelor degree to get can be a strategic stepping stone. These programs tend to offer straightforward curricula while building relevant skills, facilitating a smoother transition into specialized environmental roles or graduate studies.

Best Scientists Citing Philip Jordan

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles