World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
82
Citations
28661
World Ranking
871
National Ranking
379

William J. Riley 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 William J. Riley 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: 423 publications — 95th percentile

95% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

William J. Riley 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 William J. Riley 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: 82 D-Index — 91st percentile

91% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

William J. Riley is affiliated with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in the United States. Their research spans primarily the fields of Environmental Science and Earth and Planetary Sciences, with a significant focus on global and planetary change, atmospheric science, and ecology. Their work also addresses specific subfields such as soil science and plant science.

Their research topics cover a broad range of environmental and ecological areas, including:

  • Peatlands and Wetlands Ecology
  • Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
  • Climate change and permafrost
  • Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Climate variability and models
  • Cryospheric studies and observations
  • Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics

Among the recent papers, notable publications include:

  • "The Global Methane Budget 2000-2017" (2020, NOAA Institutional Repository)
  • "Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon" (2022, Nature Communications)
  • "Spatial heterogeneity and environmental predictors of permafrost region soil organic carbon stocks" (2021, Science Advances)
  • "Arctic tundra shrubification: a review of mechanisms and impacts on ecosystem carbon balance" (2021, Environmental Research Letters)
  • "Five years of whole-soil warming led to loss of subsoil carbon stocks and increased CO 2 efflux" (2021, Science Advances)

William J. Riley frequently collaborates with several co-authors, including:

  • Qing Zhu
  • Z. A. Mekonnen
  • Jinyun Tang
  • R. F. Grant
  • Robert B. Jackson

Their work has been published frequently in venues such as:

  • Environmental Research Letters
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)
  • Global Change Biology
  • Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Best Publications

  • The global methane budget 2000–2017

    Marielle Saunois;Ann R. Stavert;Ben Poulter;Philippe Bousquet

  • The Community Land Model version 5 : description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty

    David M. Lawrence;Rosie A. Fisher;Charles D. Koven;Keith W. Oleson

  • The global methane budget 2000–2012

    Marielle Saunois;Philippe Bousquet;Ben Poulter;Anna Peregon

  • Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon

    Unknown

  • The DOE E3SM Coupled Model Version 1: Overview and Evaluation at Standard Resolution

    Jean Christophe Golaz;Peter M. Caldwell;Luke P. Van Roekel;Mark R. Petersen

  • Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: conclusions from a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

    J. R. Melton;J. R. Melton;R. Wania;E. L. Hodson;B. Poulter

  • Indoor Particulate Matter of Outdoor Origin: Importance of Size-Dependent Removal Mechanisms

    William J. Riley;Thomas E. McKone;and Alvin C. K. Lai;William W. Nazaroff

  • Analysis of Permafrost Thermal Dynamics and Response to Climate Change in the CMIP5 Earth System Models

    Charles D. Koven;William J. Riley;Alex Stern

  • A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the North American Carbon Program site synthesis

    Kevin Schaefer;Christopher R. Schwalm;Chris Williams;M. Altaf Arain

  • The International Land Model Benchmarking (ILAMB) System: Design, Theory, and Implementation

    Nathan Collier;Forrest M. Hoffman;Forrest M. Hoffman;David M. Lawrence;Gretchen Keppel-Aleks

  • Barriers to predicting changes in global terrestrial methane fluxes: analyses using CLM4Me, a methane biogeochemistry model integrated in CESM

    W. J. Riley;Z. M. Subin;D. M. Lawrence;S. C. Swenson

  • Expert assessment of vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change

    E. A. G. Schuur;B. W. Abbott;W. B. Bowden;V. Brovkin

  • An improved lake model for climate simulations: Model structure, evaluation, and sensitivity analyses in CESM1

    Zachary M. Subin;Zachary M. Subin;William J. Riley;Dmitrii Mironov

  • Spatial heterogeneity and environmental predictors of permafrost region soil organic carbon stocks

    Umakant Mishra;Gustaf Hugelius;Eitan Shelef;Yuanhe Yang

  • A framework for benchmarking land models

    Yiqi Luo;J. Randerson;G. Abramowitz;C. Bacour

  • Permafrost carbon-climate feedback is sensitive to deep soil carbon decomposability but not deep soil nitrogen dynamics.

    Charles D. Koven;David M. Lawrence;William J. Riley

  • A model‐data intercomparison of CO2 exchange across North America: Results from the North American Carbon Program site synthesis

    Christopher R. Schwalm;Christopher A. Williams;Kevin Schaefer;Ryan S. Anderson

  • Arctic tundra shrubification: a review of mechanisms and impacts on ecosystem carbon balance

    Zelalem A Mekonnen;William J Riley;Logan T Berner;Nicholas J Bouskill

  • Methanogenesis in oxygenated soils is a substantial fraction of wetland methane emissions.

    Jordan C. Angle;Timothy H. Morin;Lindsey M. Solden;Adrienne B. Narrowe

  • Permafrost thaw and resulting soil moisture changes regulate projected high-latitude CO2 and CH4 emissions

    D. M. Lawrence;C. D. Koven;S. C. Swenson;W. J. Riley

  • Weaker soil carbon–climate feedbacks resulting from microbial and abiotic interactions

    Jinyun Tang;William J. Riley

  • Global Methane Budget 2000-2012

    M. Saunois;P. Bousquet;B. Poulter;A. Peregon

Frequent Co-Authors

Margaret S. Torn
Margaret S. Torn Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Charles D. Koven
Charles D. Koven Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Robert F. Grant
Robert F. Grant University of Alberta
James T. Randerson
James T. Randerson University of California, Irvine
Jeffrey Q. Chambers
Jeffrey Q. Chambers Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Federico Maggi
Federico Maggi University of Sydney
Christopher J. Still
Christopher J. Still Oregon State University
Forrest M. Hoffman
Forrest M. Hoffman Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Robert B. Jackson
Robert B. Jackson Stanford University
Hanqin Tian
Hanqin Tian Auburn 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

Exploring environmental sciences in the USA opens doors to diverse career paths that blend technology, policy, and social impact. For those interested in applying spatial analysis to environmental issues, pursuing gis degree programs can be invaluable. GIS skills enable professionals to map and interpret environmental data, playing a critical role in conservation and resource management.

Leadership and public administration roles often require advanced training. A focused and intensive one year mpa offers an efficient way to strengthen policy-making and management capabilities relevant to environmental organizations and government agencies.

Understanding the societal impacts of environmental changes is equally important. An best online bachelor degree in sociology can provide foundational knowledge about social behavior and structures necessary for tackling environmental justice and community-focused sustainability projects.

For those aiming to contribute meaningfully through research or academia, pursuing doctoral programs online no dissertation offers a flexible path to earning advanced credentials without the traditional dissertation requirement, ideal for professionals balancing career and education.

Best Scientists Citing William J. Riley

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles