World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Reehan S. Mirza

Reehan S. Mirza

D-Index & Metrics

Ecology and Evolution

D-Index
33
Citations
3345
World Ranking
7958
National Ranking
492

Reehan S. Mirza publication distribution in Ecology and Evolution in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Ecology and Evolution in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Reehan S. Mirza sits on this spectrum.

37–41 publications: 2 scientists 42–46 publications: 9 scientists 47–51 publications: 10 scientists 52–56 publications: 31 scientists 57–61 publications: 56 scientists 62–66 publications: 91 scientists 67–71 publications: 92 scientists 72–76 publications: 127 scientists 77–81 publications: 173 scientists 82–86 publications: 236 scientists 87–91 publications: 227 scientists 92–96 publications: 240 scientists 97–101 publications: 333 scientists 102–106 publications: 280 scientists 107–111 publications: 300 scientists 112–116 publications: 285 scientists 117–121 publications: 305 scientists 122–126 publications: 287 scientists 127–131 publications: 278 scientists 132–136 publications: 289 scientists 137–141 publications: 273 scientists 142–146 publications: 262 scientists 147–151 publications: 246 scientists 152–156 publications: 235 scientists 157–161 publications: 205 scientists 162–166 publications: 199 scientists 167–171 publications: 174 scientists 172–176 publications: 164 scientists 177–181 publications: 173 scientists 182–186 publications: 189 scientists 187–191 publications: 170 scientists 192–196 publications: 139 scientists 197–201 publications: 128 scientists 202–206 publications: 117 scientists 207–211 publications: 115 scientists 212–216 publications: 107 scientists 217–221 publications: 124 scientists 222–226 publications: 81 scientists 227–231 publications: 82 scientists 232–236 publications: 85 scientists 237–241 publications: 75 scientists 242–246 publications: 66 scientists 247–251 publications: 81 scientists 252–256 publications: 69 scientists 257–261 publications: 70 scientists 262–266 publications: 55 scientists 267–271 publications: 64 scientists 272–276 publications: 49 scientists 277–281 publications: 48 scientists 282–286 publications: 44 scientists 287–291 publications: 45 scientists 292–296 publications: 36 scientists 297–301 publications: 39 scientists 302–306 publications: 38 scientists 307–311 publications: 30 scientists 312–316 publications: 34 scientists 317–321 publications: 25 scientists 322–326 publications: 22 scientists 327–331 publications: 28 scientists 332–336 publications: 30 scientists 337–341 publications: 22 scientists 342–346 publications: 30 scientists 347–351 publications: 26 scientists 352–356 publications: 22 scientists 357–361 publications: 29 scientists 362–366 publications: 21 scientists 367–371 publications: 12 scientists 372–376 publications: 18 scientists 377–381 publications: 17 scientists 382–386 publications: 13 scientists 387–391 publications: 21 scientists 392–396 publications: 13 scientists 397–401 publications: 10 scientists 402–406 publications: 15 scientists 407–411 publications: 8 scientists 412–416 publications: 9 scientists 417–421 publications: 8 scientists 422–426 publications: 4 scientists 427–431 publications: 10 scientists 432–436 publications: 10 scientists 437–441 publications: 5 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 10 scientists 452–456 publications: 2 scientists 457–461 publications: 4 scientists 462–466 publications: 7 scientists 467–471 publications: 7 scientists 472–476 publications: 6 scientists 477–481 publications: 6 scientists 482–486 publications: 3 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 4 scientists 497–501 publications: 4 scientists 502–506 publications: 8 scientists 507–511 publications: 5 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 5 scientists 522–526 publications: 4 scientists 527–530 publications: 5 scientists 531+ publications: 100 scientists
37 publications 531+

This scientist: 44 publications — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 531 publications or more.

Reehan S. Mirza D-index placement in Ecology and Evolution in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Ecology and Evolution scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Reehan S. Mirza sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 95 scientists 31 D-Index: 123 scientists 32 D-Index: 191 scientists 33 D-Index: 245 scientists 34 D-Index: 252 scientists 35 D-Index: 244 scientists 36 D-Index: 249 scientists 37 D-Index: 244 scientists 38 D-Index: 254 scientists 39 D-Index: 254 scientists 40 D-Index: 280 scientists 41 D-Index: 274 scientists 42 D-Index: 266 scientists 43 D-Index: 233 scientists 44 D-Index: 248 scientists 45 D-Index: 208 scientists 46 D-Index: 201 scientists 47 D-Index: 213 scientists 48 D-Index: 207 scientists 49 D-Index: 172 scientists 50 D-Index: 209 scientists 51 D-Index: 199 scientists 52 D-Index: 153 scientists 53 D-Index: 169 scientists 54 D-Index: 163 scientists 55 D-Index: 148 scientists 56 D-Index: 120 scientists 57 D-Index: 146 scientists 58 D-Index: 137 scientists 59 D-Index: 140 scientists 60 D-Index: 104 scientists 61 D-Index: 119 scientists 62 D-Index: 118 scientists 63 D-Index: 99 scientists 64 D-Index: 77 scientists 65 D-Index: 100 scientists 66 D-Index: 86 scientists 67 D-Index: 83 scientists 68 D-Index: 75 scientists 69 D-Index: 94 scientists 70 D-Index: 57 scientists 71 D-Index: 68 scientists 72 D-Index: 59 scientists 73 D-Index: 63 scientists 74 D-Index: 66 scientists 75 D-Index: 60 scientists 76 D-Index: 42 scientists 77 D-Index: 49 scientists 78 D-Index: 39 scientists 79 D-Index: 37 scientists 80 D-Index: 43 scientists 81 D-Index: 41 scientists 82 D-Index: 45 scientists 83 D-Index: 34 scientists 84 D-Index: 40 scientists 85 D-Index: 35 scientists 86 D-Index: 55 scientists 87 D-Index: 24 scientists 88 D-Index: 24 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 23 scientists 91 D-Index: 25 scientists 92 D-Index: 27 scientists 93 D-Index: 27 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 23 scientists 96 D-Index: 12 scientists 97 D-Index: 14 scientists 98 D-Index: 19 scientists 99 D-Index: 16 scientists 100 D-Index: 14 scientists 101 D-Index: 5 scientists 102 D-Index: 21 scientists 103 D-Index: 16 scientists 104 D-Index: 10 scientists 105 D-Index: 7 scientists 106 D-Index: 7 scientists 107 D-Index: 7 scientists 108 D-Index: 6 scientists 109 D-Index: 9 scientists 110 D-Index: 11 scientists 111 D-Index: 12 scientists 112 D-Index: 9 scientists 113 D-Index: 7 scientists 114 D-Index: 3 scientists 115 D-Index: 8 scientists 116 D-Index: 5 scientists 117 D-Index: 11 scientists 118 D-Index: 4 scientists 119 D-Index: 2 scientists 120 D-Index: 5 scientists 121+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 121+

This scientist: 33 D-Index — 8th percentile

8% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 121 D-Index or more.

Overview

Reehan S. Mirza is affiliated with Nipissing University in Canada. Their academic profile reflects ongoing contributions within their institution.

There are no recorded recent papers, frequent co-authors, or specific publication venues associated with Reehan S. Mirza in the available data.

Similarly, information regarding book publications, main fields of study, subfields, and main research topics is not provided. There are no awards or honors listed for this scientist.

The absence of detailed publication records, co-author collaborations, or documented research focus areas suggests a limited publicly accessible academic footprint or that relevant data has yet to be indexed.

As Reehan S. Mirza is not deceased, their academic and research activities may continue to develop or expand.

Best Publications

  • Predator-recognition training enhances survival of brook trout: evidence from laboratory and field-enclosure studies

    Reehan S Mirza;Douglas P Chivers

  • Threat-sensitive predator avoidance by slimy sculpins: understanding the importance of visual versus chemical information

    Douglas P Chivers;Reehan S Mirza;Pamela J Bryer;Joseph M Kiesecker

  • Epidermal ‘alarm substance’ cells of fishes maintained by non-alarm functions: possible defence against pathogens, parasites and UVB radiation

    Douglas P Chivers;Brian D Wisenden;Carrie J Hindman;Tracy A Michalak

  • Predator Diet Cues and the Assessment of Predation Risk by Aquatic Vertebrates: A Review and Prospectus

    Douglas P. Chivers;Reehan S. Mirza

  • Are chemical alarm cues conserved within salmonid fishes

    Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

  • Response of juvenile rainbow trout to varying concentrations of chemical alarm cue: response thresholds and survival during encounters with predators

    Reehan S Mirza;Douglas P Chivers

  • Importance of predator diet cues in responses of larval wood frogs to fish and invertebrate predators.

    Douglas P. Chivers;Reehan S. Mirza

  • Responses of American toad tadpoles to predation cues: behavioural response thresholds, threat-sensitivity and acquired predation recognition

    Reehan S. Mirza;Maud C.O. Ferrari;Joseph M. Kiesecker;Douglas P. Chivers

  • Making sense of predator scents: investigating the sophistication of predator assessment abilities of fathead minnows

    Robin C. Kusch;Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

  • Chemosensory assessment of predation risk by slimy sculpins (Cottus cognatus): responses to alarm, disturbance, and predator cues.

    Pamela J. Bryer;Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

  • LEARNED RECOGNITION OF HETEROSPECIFIC ALARM CUES ENHANCES SURVIVAL DURING ENCOUNTERS WITH PREDATORS

    Douglas P. Chivers;Reehan S. Mirza;Jeffery G. Johnston

  • Chemical Alarm Signals Enhance Survival of Brook Charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) During Encounters with Predatory Chain Pickerel (Esox niger)

    Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

  • Differential responses of male and female red swordtails to chemical alarm cues

    R. S. Mirza;J. J. Scott;D. P. Chivers

  • Does Temporal Variation in Predation Risk Influence the Intensity of Antipredator Responses? A Test of the Risk Allocation Hypothesis

    Reehan S. Mirza;Alicia Mathis;Douglas P. Chivers

  • Copper binding dynamics and olfactory impairment in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas).

    Warren W. Green;Reehan S. Mirza;Chris M. Wood;Greg G. Pyle

  • Fathead Minnows, Pimephales promelas, Learn to Recognize Chemical Alarm Cues of Introduced Brook Stickleback, Culaea inconstans

    Michael S. Pollock;Douglas P. Chivers;Reehan S. Mirza;Brian D. Wisenden

  • Copper-Impaired Chemosensory Function and Behavior in Aquatic Animals

    Gregory G. Pyle;Reehan S. Mirza

  • Responses of wild fishes to alarm chemicals in pristine and metal-contaminated lakes

    Taryn D. McPherson;Reehan S. Mirza;Gregory Pyle

  • Brook char (Salvelinus fontinalis) can differentiate chemical alarm cues produced by different age/size classes of conspecifics.

    Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

  • BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSES TO CONSPECIFIC DISTURBANCE CHEMICALS ENHANCE SURVIVAL OF JUVENILE BROOK CHARR, SALVELINUS FONTINALIS, DURING ENCOUNTERS WITH PREDATORS

    Reehan S. Mirza;Douglas P. Chivers

Frequent Co-Authors

Douglas P. Chivers
Douglas P. Chivers University of Saskatchewan
Grant E. Brown
Grant E. Brown Concordia University
Brian D. Wisenden
Brian D. Wisenden Minnesota State University Moorhead
Alicia Mathis
Alicia Mathis Missouri State University
Joseph M. Kiesecker
Joseph M. Kiesecker The Nature Conservancy
Maud C. O. Ferrari
Maud C. O. Ferrari University of Saskatchewan
Chris M. Wood
Chris M. Wood University of British Columbia
Andrew R. Blaustein
Andrew R. Blaustein Oregon State University
Jean-Guy J. Godin
Jean-Guy J. Godin Carleton 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

Studying Ecology and Evolution opens doors to a variety of dynamic career paths. Many students pursue research, fieldwork, or environmental policy. However, some find themselves exploring roles outside traditional science tracks, such as education or design. If you’re considering a career pivot, you might ask: can you become a speech pathologist with an education degree? This question highlights how versatile your academic background can be, especially as you gain new skills online.

Online degrees provide flexible opportunities for specialization. Beyond biology, fields like architect degree online and online degree mathematics are increasingly popular for those wanting to combine their scientific interests with design or quantitative analysis. Creative students may also explore visual communication through online graphic design schools.

Choosing interdisciplinary or adjacent fields can broaden your career options and encourage innovative approaches in ecological research or advocacy. Exploring online learning opportunities means your career path can be as unique and adaptable as your interests.

Best Scientists Citing Reehan S. Mirza

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles