World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Thomas F. E. Barth

Thomas F. E. Barth

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Molecular Biology 64 1745 1567 121 112 256 14310

Thomas F. E. Barth publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Thomas F. E. Barth between 1989 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Thomas F. E. Barth published across 37 years, from 1989 to 2025, averaging 13.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 91 publications in 2023. 32 of the 500 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
20 40 60 80
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1989 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 91. Peak 91 publications in 2023. 1989: 1 publication 1990: 0 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 0 publications 1993: 3 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 1 publication 1996: 3 publications 1997: 5 publications 1998: 6 publications 1999: 1 publication 2000: 5 publications 2001: 6 publications 2002: 7 publications 2003: 11 publications 2004: 9 publications 2005: 5 publications 2006: 14 publications 2007: 13 publications 2008: 12 publications 2009: 14 publications 2010: 15 publications 2011: 13 publications 2012: 16 publications 2013: 20 publications 2014: 18 publications 2015: 13 publications 2016: 14 publications 2017: 42 publications 2018: 19 publications 2019: 19 publications 2020: 21 publications 2021: 36 publications 2022: 11 publications 2023: 91 publications 2024: 13 publications 2025: 19 publications
1989 2025

500 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Thomas F. E. Barth: publications per year, 1989 to 2025
Year Publications
1989 1
1990 0
1991 0
1992 0
1993 3
1994 4
1995 1
1996 3
1997 5
1998 6
1999 1
2000 5
2001 6
2002 7
2003 11
2004 9
2005 5
2006 14
2007 13
2008 12
2009 14
2010 15
2011 13
2012 16
2013 20
2014 18
2015 13
2016 14
2017 42
2018 19
2019 19
2020 21
2021 36
2022 11
2023 91
2024 13
2025 19
Total 500
Download as CSV

Thomas F. E. Barth publications per year - data summary

  • Thomas F. E. Barth, a Molecular Biology scholar from University of Ulm, has 500 publications recorded across 37 years, from 1989 to 2025.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1989 and the most recent to 2025.
  • The most productive year is 2023, with 91 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 1989, 1995 and 1999, with 1 publication each.
  • 3 of the 37 years in the span carry no publications at all (1990, 1991 and 1992).
  • The rate of publication averages 13.5 papers per year over the whole span, or 14.7 per year counting only the 34 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2021-2025) hold 170 publications, 34% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1989-2001: 35 publications (2.7 per year); 2002-2014: 167 publications (12.8 per year); 2015-2025: 298 publications (27.1 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Thomas F. E. Barth publication distribution in Molecular Biology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Molecular Biology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas F. E. Barth sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
50 100 150
Bar chart with 53 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 47–56 to 564+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 177. Most scientists, 177, have 117–126 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 564 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 247–256 publications, is where this scientist sits. 47–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–66 publications: 17 scientists 67–76 publications: 65 scientists 77–86 publications: 90 scientists 87–96 publications: 125 scientists 97–106 publications: 131 scientists 107–116 publications: 162 scientists 117–126 publications: 177 scientists 127–136 publications: 158 scientists 137–146 publications: 158 scientists 147–156 publications: 146 scientists 157–166 publications: 159 scientists 167–176 publications: 131 scientists 177–186 publications: 110 scientists 187–196 publications: 112 scientists 197–206 publications: 100 scientists 207–216 publications: 89 scientists 217–226 publications: 98 scientists 227–236 publications: 74 scientists 237–246 publications: 72 scientists 247–256 publications: 63 scientists 257–266 publications: 53 scientists 267–276 publications: 54 scientists 277–286 publications: 49 scientists 287–296 publications: 52 scientists 297–306 publications: 43 scientists 307–316 publications: 46 scientists 317–326 publications: 41 scientists 327–336 publications: 42 scientists 337–346 publications: 31 scientists 347–356 publications: 28 scientists 357–366 publications: 29 scientists 367–376 publications: 26 scientists 377–386 publications: 24 scientists 387–396 publications: 24 scientists 397–406 publications: 14 scientists 407–416 publications: 13 scientists 417–426 publications: 20 scientists 427–436 publications: 12 scientists 437–446 publications: 20 scientists 447–456 publications: 11 scientists 457–466 publications: 10 scientists 467–476 publications: 14 scientists 477–486 publications: 14 scientists 487–496 publications: 10 scientists 497–506 publications: 13 scientists 507–516 publications: 13 scientists 517–526 publications: 2 scientists 527–536 publications: 4 scientists 537–546 publications: 6 scientists 547–556 publications: 8 scientists 557–563 publications: 6 scientists 564+ publications: 100 scientists
47–56 publications 564+

This scientist: 256 publications — 73rd percentile

73% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 564 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Molecular Biology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 3,076 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
47–56 7
57–66 17
67–76 65
77–86 90
87–96 125
97–106 131
107–116 162
117–126 177
127–136 158
137–146 158
147–156 146
157–166 159
167–176 131
177–186 110
187–196 112
197–206 100
207–216 89
217–226 98
227–236 74
237–246 72
247–256 63 256
257–266 53
267–276 54
277–286 49
287–296 52
297–306 43
307–316 46
317–326 41
327–336 42
337–346 31
347–356 28
357–366 29
367–376 26
377–386 24
387–396 24
397–406 14
407–416 13
417–426 20
427–436 12
437–446 20
447–456 11
457–466 10
467–476 14
477–486 14
487–496 10
497–506 13
507–516 13
517–526 2
527–536 4
537–546 6
547–556 8
557–563 6
564+ 100
Download as CSV

Thomas F. E. Barth publication distribution in Molecular Biology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 3,076 Molecular Biology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 53 ranges running from 47–56 to 564+ publications.
  • Thomas F. E. Barth, a Molecular Biology scholar from University of Ulm, records 256 publications - the 73rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 73% of ranked Molecular Biology scientists score the same or lower than Thomas F. E. Barth, and about 27% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 177–186 publications range, and Thomas F. E. Barth ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 117–126 publications, holding 177 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 53% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 177–186 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 564 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (3% of the field).

Thomas F. E. Barth D-index placement in Molecular Biology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Molecular Biology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas F. E. Barth sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
25 50 75 100 125
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 40–41 to 145+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 131. Most scientists, 131, have 64–65 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 145 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 64–65 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 40–41 D-Index: 36 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 101 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 115 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 121 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 118 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 130 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 106 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 116 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 113 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 129 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 120 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 105 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 131 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 95 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 97 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 106 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 83 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 89 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 77 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 70 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 73 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 60 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 48 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 45 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 50 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 31 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 51 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 43 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 39 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 41 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 29 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 33 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 35 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 20 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 38 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 19 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 28 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 13 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 23 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 15 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 11 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 21 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 14 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 9 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 16 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 7 scientists 144 D-Index: 7 scientists 145+ D-Index: 100 scientists
40–41 D-Index 145+

This scientist: 64 D-Index — 45th percentile

45% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 145 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Molecular Biology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 3,076 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
40–41 36
42–43 101
44–45 115
46–47 121
48–49 118
50–51 130
52–53 106
54–55 116
56–57 113
58–59 129
60–61 120
62–63 105
64–65 131 64
66–67 95
68–69 97
70–71 106
72–73 83
74–75 89
76–77 77
78–79 70
80–81 73
82–83 60
84–85 48
86–87 45
88–89 50
90–91 31
92–93 51
94–95 43
96–97 38
98–99 39
100–101 41
102–103 29
104–105 33
106–107 35
108–109 20
110–111 38
112–113 19
114–115 28
116–117 13
118–119 23
120–121 16
122–123 15
124–125 11
126–127 21
128–129 7
130–131 13
132–133 14
134–135 17
136–137 9
138–139 8
140–141 16
142–143 7
144 7
145+ 100
Download as CSV

Thomas F. E. Barth D-index placement in Molecular Biology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 3,076 Molecular Biology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 54 ranges running from 40–41 to 145+ D-Index.
  • Thomas F. E. Barth, a Molecular Biology scholar from University of Ulm, records 64 D-Index - the 45th percentile of the discipline.
  • 45% of ranked Molecular Biology scientists score the same or lower than Thomas F. E. Barth, and about 55% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 68–69 D-Index range, and Thomas F. E. Barth ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 64–65 D-Index, holding 131 scientists (4% of the field).
  • 50% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 66–67 D-Index), so the distribution leans towards the lower end of the scale.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 145 D-Index or more, 100 scientists in all (3% of the field).

Best Publications

  • A Biologic Definition of Burkitt's Lymphoma from Transcriptional and Genomic Profiling

    Michael Hummel;Stefan Bentink;Hilmar Berger;Wolfram Klapper

  • T-lymphocyte infiltration in visceral adipose tissue: a primary event in adipose tissue inflammation and the development of obesity-mediated insulin resistance.

    Ulrich Kintscher;Martin Hartge;Katharina Hess;Anna Foryst-Ludwig

  • MYC status in concert with BCL2 and BCL6 expression predicts outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

    Heike Horn;Marita Ziepert;Claudia Becher;Thomas F. E. Barth

  • SARS-CoV-2 infects and replicates in cells of the human endocrine and exocrine pancreas.

    Janis A Müller;Rüdiger Groß;Carina Conzelmann;Jana Krüger

  • MYC stimulates EZH2 expression by repression of its negative regulator miR-26a.

    Sandrine Sander;Lars Bullinger;Kay Klapproth;Katja Fiedler

  • Classical Hodgkin lymphoma is characterized by recurrent copy number gains of the short arm of chromosome 2.

    Stefan Joos;Christiane K. Menz;Gunnar Wrobel;Reiner Siebert

  • Reticular dysgenesis (aleukocytosis) is caused by mutations in the gene encoding mitochondrial adenylate kinase 2

    Ulrich Pannicke;Manfred Hönig;Manfred Hönig;Isabell Hess;Claudia Friesen

  • Gains of 2p involving the REL locus correlate with nuclear c-Rel protein accumulation in neoplastic cells of classical Hodgkin lymphoma

    Thomas F.E. Barth;José I. Martin-Subero;Stefan Joos;Christiane K. Menz

  • Rapid onset of apoptosis in vitro follows disruption of beta 1-integrin/matrix interactions in human colonic crypt cells.

    J. Sträter;U. Wedding;T. F. E. Barth;K. Koretz

  • Hodgkin's lymphoma cell lines are characterized by frequent aberrations on chromosomes 2p and 9p including REL and JAK2

    Stefan Joos;Martin Granzow;Heidi Holtgreve-Grez;Reiner Siebert

  • Gain of chromosome arm 9p is characteristic of primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (MBL): comprehensive molecular cytogenetic analysis and presentation of a novel MBL cell line.

    Martin Bentz;Thomas F.E. Barth;Silke Brüderlein;Daliah Bock

  • t(11;14)-positive mantle cell lymphomas exhibit complex karyotypes and share similarities with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

    Martin Bentz;Anja Plesch;Lars Bullinger;Stephan Stilgenbauer

  • VH mutation status and VDJ rearrangement structure in mantle cell lymphoma: correlation with genomic aberrations, clinical characteristics, and outcome.

    Dirk Kienle;Dirk Kienle;Alexander Kröber;Alexander Kröber;Tiemo Katzenberger;Tiemo Katzenberger;German Ott;German Ott

  • Mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma: where do we stand?

    Thomas F E Barth;Frank Leithäuser;Stefan Joos;Martin Bentz

  • Genomic DNA-chip hybridization in t(11;14)-positive mantle cell lymphomas shows a high frequency of aberrations and allows a refined characterization of consensus regions.

    Holger Kohlhammer;Carsten Schwaenen;Swen Wessendorf;Karlheinz Holzmann

  • High incidence of chromosomal imbalances and gene amplifications in the classical follicular variant of follicle center lymphoma

    Martin Bentz;Claudius A. Werner;Hartmut Dohner;Stefan Joos

  • Hidden gene amplifications in aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas detected by microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization.

    Swen Wessendorf;Carsten Schwaenen;Holger Kohlhammer;Dirk Kienle

  • Characteristic Pattern of Chromosomal Gains and Losses in Primary Large B-Cell Lymphomas of the Gastrointestinal Tract

    Thomas F.E. Barth;Hartmut Döhner;Claudius A. Werner;Stephan Stilgenbauer

  • Clinicopathologic Correlations of Genomic Gains and Losses in Follicular Lymphoma

    Andreas Viardot;Peter Möller;Josef Högel;Kirsten Werner

  • GSE12278: MYC stimulates EZH2 expression by repression of its negative regulator miR-26a.

    Lars Bullinger;Sandrine Sander;Kay Klapproth;Katja Fiedler

Frequent Co-Authors

Peter Möller
Peter Möller University of Ulm
Hartmut Döhner
Hartmut Döhner University of Ulm
Klaus-Michael Debatin
Klaus-Michael Debatin University of Ulm
Peter Møller
Peter Møller University of Copenhagen
Reiner Siebert
Reiner Siebert University of Ulm
Peter Lichter
Peter Lichter German Cancer Research Center
Stephan Stilgenbauer
Stephan Stilgenbauer University of Ulm
Andreas Rosenwald
Andreas Rosenwald University of Würzburg
Wolfram Klapper
Wolfram Klapper Kiel University
Harald Stein
Harald Stein Charité - University Medicine Berlin

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

Exploring Molecular Biology opens the door to varied career options, and many related fields can be pursued flexibly through online study. For those interested in the intersection of biology and mental health, a masters degree in counseling online can lead to rewarding roles assisting individuals and communities. Such programs are ideal for blending scientific knowledge with clinical skills.

If your interests lie in applying biology to legal or investigative contexts, you may be curious about what can you do with a masters in forensic psychology. This path combines molecular research with the study of behavior and law.

For those passionate about developmental sciences, child psychology masters programs offer the chance to specialize in youth mental health and behavior. These programs can complement a background in Molecular Biology, especially when working in pediatric research or healthcare.

Moreover, online masters degrees in counseling provide flexible and affordable pathways to credentials in the mental health sector—ideal for science graduates looking to make a direct impact.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas F. E. Barth

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles