World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
46
Citations
8447
World Ranking
6058
National Ranking
400

Thomas Knoke 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 Thomas Knoke sits on this spectrum.

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: 283 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: 25 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 18 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 681–686 publications: 3 scientists 687+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 687+

This scientist: 239 publications — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 687 publications or more.

Thomas Knoke 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 Thomas Knoke sits on this spectrum.

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: 199 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: 19 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: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 125+

This scientist: 46 D-Index — 39th percentile

39% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 125 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Changes of ecosystem service values in response to land use/land cover dynamics in Munessa-Shashemene landscape of the Ethiopian highlands.

    Mengistie Kindu;Thomas Schneider;Demel Teketay;Thomas Knoke

  • Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics

    Thomas Knoke;Christian Ammer;Bernd Stimm;Reinhard Mosandl

  • Land Use/Land Cover Change Analysis Using Object-Based Classification Approach in Munessa-Shashemene Landscape of the Ethiopian Highlands

    Mengistie Kindu;Thomas Schneider;Demel Teketay;Thomas Knoke

  • Silvicultural alternatives to conventional even-aged forest management - what limits global adoption?

    Klaus J Puettmann;Scott McG Wilson;Susan C Baker;Pablo J Donoso

  • Drivers of land use/land cover changes in Munessa-Shashemene landscape of the south-central highlands of Ethiopia

    Mengistie Kindu;Thomas Schneider;Demel Teketay;Thomas Knoke

  • Mixed forests reconsidered: A forest economics contribution on an ecological concept.

    Thomas-H. Knoke;Bernd Stimm;Christian-H. Ammer;Martin Moog

  • Investment decisions under uncertainty—A methodological review on forest science studies

    Patrick Hildebrandt;Thomas Knoke

  • Growth performance, windthrow, and insects: meta-analyses of parameters influencing performance of mixed-species stands in boreal and northern temperate biomes

    Unknown

  • Survival of Norway spruce remains higher in mixed stands under a dryer and warmer climate.

    Susanne Neuner;Axel Albrecht;Dominik Cullmann;Friedrich Engels

  • Economic evaluation of short rotation coppice systems for energy from biomass—A review

    Unknown

  • Does mixing tree species enhance stand resistance against natural hazards? A case study for spruce

    Unknown

  • Hybrid MCDA Methods to Integrate Multiple Ecosystem Services in Forest Management Planning: A Critical Review

    Britta Uhde;W. Andreas Hahn;Verena C. Griess;Thomas Knoke

  • Afforestation or intense pasturing improve the ecological and economic value of abandoned tropical farmlands

    Thomas Knoke;Jörg Bendix;Perdita Pohle;Ute Hamer

  • Agroforestry versus farm mosaic systems – Comparing land-use efficiency, economic returns and risks under climate change effects

    Unknown

  • Sustainable development and sustainable forestry: analogies, differences, and the role of flexibility

    Unknown

  • Natural disturbance regimes as a guide for sustainable forest management in Europe.

    Unknown

  • Scenario modelling of land use/land cover changes in Munessa-Shashemene landscape of the Ethiopian highlands

    Mengistie Kindu;Thomas Schneider;Martin Döllerer;Demel Teketay

  • Mixed forests and a flexible harvest policy: a problem for conventional risk analysis?

    Unknown

  • Integrating selected ecological effects of mixed European beech-Norway spruce stands in bioeconomic modelling

    Unknown

  • Predicting red heartwood formation in beech trees (Fagus sylvatica L.)

    Unknown

Frequent Co-Authors

Thomas Schneider
Thomas Schneider National Institutes of Health
Demel Teketay
Demel Teketay Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Christian Ammer
Christian Ammer University of Göttingen
Anja Rammig
Anja Rammig Technical University of Munich
Hans Pretzsch
Hans Pretzsch Technical University of Munich
Jürgen Bauhus
Jürgen Bauhus University of Freiburg
Jörg Bendix
Jörg Bendix Philipp University of Marburg
Erwin Beck
Erwin Beck University of Bayreuth
Lutz Breuer
Lutz Breuer University of Giessen
Marco Heurich
Marco Heurich University of Freiburg

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 students interested in Environmental Sciences, pursuing related online degrees can open diverse career pathways. Many advanced degrees now offer flexibility, such as online doctoral programs without dissertation, which allow working professionals to balance study with career demands.

If you are considering advancing your education further, exploring the best online eds to edd programs can help enhance leadership skills, particularly in educational or environmental policy sectors. These programs blend theory with practical application for immediate impact.

For those aiming to integrate social work with environmental advocacy, affordable options like fully funded dsw programs online provide an excellent route to doctoral credentials without excessive financial burden.

Additionally, many students begin with low cost online general studies degree programs. These degrees offer a broad foundation and can serve as a pathway into specialized environmental fields or related interdisciplinary careers.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas Knoke

Recently Published Articles