World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Ecology and Evolution

D-Index
42
Citations
6811
World Ranking
5580
National Ranking
1909

Thomas E. Miller publications per year

1982: 2 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 1 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 5 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 1 publications 1990: 2 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 0 publications 1993: 0 publications 1994: 2 publications 1995: 2 publications 1996: 5 publications 1997: 1 publications 1998: 3 publications 1999: 1 publications 2000: 0 publications 2001: 0 publications 2002: 3 publications 2003: 4 publications 2004: 6 publications 2005: 1 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 5 publications 2008: 5 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 4 publications 2013: 2 publications 2014: 5 publications 2015: 7 publications 2016: 6 publications 2017: 3 publications 2018: 7 publications 2019: 4 publications 2020: 6 publications 2021: 8 publications 2022: 5 publications 2023: 1 publications 2024: 3 publications 2025: 2 publications 2026: 1 publications
1982 2026

127 publications in total across all disciplines

Thomas E. Miller 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 Thomas E. Miller 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: 112 publications — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas E. Miller 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 Thomas E. Miller 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: 42 D-Index — 35th percentile

35% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Thomas E. Miller is affiliated with Florida State University in the United States and has a body of research focusing primarily on agricultural and biological sciences, environmental science, and earth and planetary sciences. Their work spans several interrelated subfields, including oceanography, ecology, ecology, evolution, behavior and systematics, plant science, and signal processing.

The scientist's main research topics include marine and coastal plant biology, coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics, marine biology and ecology research, plant and animal studies, plant and biological electrophysiology studies, plant parasitism and resistance, and speech and audio processing.

Their recent published papers reflect a focus on ecological and microbial community dynamics. These publications include:

  • The evolution of niche overlap and competitive differences (2021, Nature Ecology & Evolution)
  • Composition of seagrass phyllosphere microbial communities suggests rapid environmental regulation of community structure (2021, FEMS Microbiology Ecology)
  • Host and environmental determinants of microbial community structure in the marine phyllosphere (2020, PLoS ONE)
  • Environmental stressors alter the composition of seagrass phyllosphere microbial communities (2021, Climate Change Ecology)
  • Predator dispersal influences predator distribution but not prey diversity in pitcher plant microbial metacommunities (2022, Ecology)

Thomas E. Miller has frequently collaborated with several coauthors, including Olivia U. Mason, Margaret A. Vogel, Catalina Cuellar-Gempeler, Abigail I. Pastore, and Casey P. terHorst.

The scientist has published in multiple venues, with repeated contributions to journals such as PLoS ONE and The American Naturalist. Other publication venues include Nature Ecology & Evolution, FEMS Microbiology Ecology, and Climate Change Ecology.

Best Publications

  • Are natural microcosms useful model systems for ecology

    Diane S. Srivastava;Jurek Kolasa;Jan Bengtsson;Andrew Gonzalez

  • Effects of Different Resource Additions of Species Diversity in an Annual Plant Community

    Deborah E. Goldberg;Thomas E. Miller;Thomas E. Miller

  • Dispersal rates affect species composition in metacommunities of Sarracenia purpurea inquilines.

    Jamie M. Kneitel;Thomas E. Miller

  • A Critical Review of Twenty Years' Use of the Resource-Ratio Theory

    Thomas E. Miller;Jean H. Burns;Pablo Munguia;Eric L. Walters;Eric L. Walters

  • Competitive Effects and Responses Between Plant Species in a First‐Year Old‐Field Community

    T. E. Miller;T. E. Miller;P. A. Werner

  • Community Diversity and Interactions Between the Size and Frequency of Disturbance

    Thomas E. Miller

  • DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPECIES INTERACTIONS IN AN EARLY OLD-FIELD PLANT COMMUNITY

    Thomas E. Miller

  • The evolution of niche overlap and competitive differences

    Abigail I. Pastore;Abigail I. Pastore;György Barabás;György Barabás;Malyon D. Bimler;Margaret M. Mayfield

  • Climate and coastal dune vegetation disturbance, recovery, and succession

    T. E. Miller;E. S. Gornish;H. L. Buckley

  • Effects of emergence time on survival and growth in an early old-field plant community.

    T. E. Miller

  • Community assembly time and the relationship between local and regional species richness

    N. Mouquet;N. Mouquet;P. Munguia;J. M. Kneitel;T. E. Miller

  • Catastrophic decline of a top carnivore in the gulf of california rocky intertidal zone.

    Michael L. Dungan;Thomas E. Miller;Donald A. Thomson

  • RESOURCE AND TOP‐PREDATOR REGULATION IN THE PITCHER PLANT (SARRACENIA PURPUREA) INQUILINE COMMUNITY

    Jamie M. Kneitel;Thomas E. Miller

  • The Evolutionary Role of Indirect Effects in Communities

    Thomas E. Miller;Joseph Travis

  • Reverse latitudinal trends in species richness of pitcher-plant food webs

    Hannah L. Buckley;Hannah L. Buckley;Thomas E. Miller;Aaron M. Ellison;Nicholas J. Gotelli

  • Morphological variation in Sarracenia purpurea (Sarraceniaceae): geographic, environmental, and taxonomic correlates

    Aaron M. Ellison;Hannah L. Buckley;Thomas E. Miller;Nicholas J. Gotelli

  • EFFECT OF COMMUNITY STRUCTURE ON INVASION SUCCESS AND RATE

    Thomas E. Miller;Jamie M. Kneitel;Jean H. Burns

  • The evolutionary ecology of carnivorous plants

    Aaron M. Ellison;Nicholas J. Gotelli;J.Stephen Brewer;D.Liane Cochran-Stafira

  • Local Density Variation may Mimic Effects of Asymmetric Competition on Plant Size Variability

    Thomas E. Miller;Jacob Weiner

  • Evolution in a Community Context: Trait Responses to Multiple Species Interactions*

    Casey P. terHorst;Peter C. Zee;Katy D. Heath;Thomas E. Miller

  • The Effects of Surrounding Vegetation and Transplant Age on the Detection of Local Adaptation in the Perennial Grass Aristida Stricta

    Carolyn E. Kindell;Alice A. Winn;Thomas E. Miller

Frequent Co-Authors

Hannah L. Buckley
Hannah L. Buckley Auckland University of Technology
Nicolas Mouquet
Nicolas Mouquet University of Montpellier
Aaron M. Ellison
Aaron M. Ellison Harvard University
Nicholas J. Gotelli
Nicholas J. Gotelli University of Vermont
Andrew Gonzalez
Andrew Gonzalez McGill University
Joseph Travis
Joseph Travis Florida State University
Sebastian J. Schreiber
Sebastian J. Schreiber University of California, Davis
Jurek Kolasa
Jurek Kolasa McMaster University
Mathew A. Leibold
Mathew A. Leibold University of Florida
Douglas W. Schemske
Douglas W. Schemske Michigan State 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 impactful career paths across research, conservation, education, and policy. Today, the rise of quality online education makes it easier than ever for students with diverse backgrounds and schedules to pursue related degrees. For those in the armed forces, online military friendly colleges offer flexible learning that seamlessly aligns with active duty and veteran lifestyles.

Fields such as environmental social work and mental health are closely linked to ecology and human populations. Exploring lcsw online programs can enhance your ability to address social and ecological challenges. Additionally, students interested in behavior, cognition, or conservation may benefit from a master psychologie à distance—an accelerated online master's in psychology.

The demand for counseling professionals versed in environmental and societal stressors is rising. Earning a master of mental health online can position graduates to support communities affected by ecological changes. Whichever path you choose, online degrees now make it possible to gain the expertise needed for dynamic and rewarding roles at the intersection of ecology, society, and innovation.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas E. Miller

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles