International Journal of Acarology
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q2
WOS
Q3
Impact factor
0.9
SJR
0.454
CiteScore
2.2
Categories
Insect Science
Areas
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Years of issue
1975-2025
journal names
International Journal of Acarology
INT J ACAROL
Top-3 citing journals

International Journal of Acarology
(2815 citations)

Zootaxa
(1125 citations)

Experimental and Applied Acarology
(1023 citations)
Top-3 organizations

University of Tyumen
(92 publications)

Universidade Estadual Paulista
(57 publications)

University of Tehran
(49 publications)

University of Tyumen
(51 publications)

Universidade Estadual Paulista
(23 publications)

Guizhou University
(20 publications)
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 885
Q3

An UPLC-MS/MS method for determination of karacoline in mice and its pharmacokinetics study
Huang W., Dong X., Lin R., Ma J.
AbstractIn this experiment, ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) was employed to quantify karacoline in mouse plasma following both intravenous and oral administration, thereby elucidating the pharmacokinetic characteristics of karacoline in mice. The analytes were extracted from mouse plasma using acetonitrile for protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was performed on an HSS T3 column via gradient elution, with the mobile phase consisting of methanol and 0.1% formic acid in water. Quantification of karacoline and the internal standard (IS) was achieved using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Six mice received an intravenous (i.v.) injection of karacoline at a dose of 1 mg kg−1, while another six mice were administered karacoline orally (p.o.) at a dose of 5 mg kg−1. The calibration curve for karacoline in mouse plasma ranged from 1 ng mL−1 to 2,500 ng mL−1. The intra-day precision was within 10.4%, and the inter-day precision was within 13.0%. Accuracy ranged from 89.1% to 107.5%, with recovery rates between 77.6% and 88.2%. Matrix effects were observed within the range of 77.6%–107.4%. This method successfully estimated the pharmacokinetics of karacoline, and its bioavailability was determined to be 27.2%, these are preliminary studies that require verification on a larger group of animals.
Q3

Ultra-fast eco-friendly UHPLC–MS/MS methodology for the quantification of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes: Evaluation of metabolic stability via in silico software and in vitro metabolic incubation
Attwa M.W., Abdelhameed A.S., Kadi A.A.
AbstractASP3026 is a recently formulated and highly selective inhibitor designed to target the ALK kinase. ASP3026 efficiently inhibited ALK kinase activity and demonstrated superior selectivity at a panel of Tyr-kinases compared to crizotinib. The target of this investigation was to establish a highly accurate, fast, green, and highly sensitive Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography- Tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) technique for assessing the concentration of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes (HLMs). In vitro incubation, the metabolic stability of ASP3026 in HLMs was evaluated using this known approach. The validation steps for the UHPLC-MS/MS analytical technique in the HLMs were performed along with the bio-analytical method validation guidelines settled by the US-FDA. To increase the ecological sustainability of the current UHPLC-MS/MS system, a lower flow rate of 0.3 mL min−1, a shorter elution duration of 1 min, and a reduced consumption of ACN have been implemented. A screening of the chemical structure of ASP3026 for hazardous alerts and metabolic lability was performed by the StarDrop package, that includes the DEREK and P450 modules. The analytical separation of ASP3026 and fenebrutinib (FNB) on the reversed phase Eclipse Plus C18 column was performed using an isocratic mobile phase approach. The calibration curve produced by the ASP3026 showed a linear association over the level range of 1–3,000 ng mL−1. A study was conducted to evaluate the precision and accuracy of UHPLC-MS/MS technology in evaluating both intra-day and inter-day variations. The accuracy exhibited a range of −1.56%–7.33% across various days, and a range of −0.78%–10.66% within the same day. The ASP3026 underwent in vitro half-life and intrinsic clearance measurements, yielding values of 14.32 min and 56.62 mL min−1 kg−1, correspondingly. According to in silico software research, using minor modifications to the piperazine component or substituting the group in drug design has the potential to improve the metabolic safety and stability of novel derivatives in comparison to ASP3026.
Q3

Application of a multivariate optimization strategy to validate an RP-HPLC analytical method for determining hydroxychloroquine sulphate in pharmaceutical products and in forced degradation studies
Toti M.C., Bonfilio R., de Araújo M.B.
AbstractIn this study, a multivariate optimization strategy was used to develop and validate a simple, rapid, accurate, cost-effective, and stability-indicative RP-HPLC analytical method for quantifying hydroxychloroquine sulphate (HCQ) in coated tablets. The validation conditions involved isocratic elution mode, using a mixture of buffer solution at pH 2.2 and methanol (74:26, v/v) as the mobile phase, an Agilent® reverse phase column, model Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 (250 cm × 4.6 mm × 5 μm), a flow rate of 1.3 mL min−1, column temperature 40 °C and detection at 343 nm. The method showed linearity in the range of 4–44 μg mL−1, with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.9998. Recovery obtained average values of between 99.71 and 100.84% and precision with average RSD values of <2%. The robustness demonstrated by assessing the effect of seven variables (pH of the mobile phase buffer; percentage of methanol; filter brand; mobile phase flow rate; wavelength; column temperature and sample agitation time), with effect values for each variable lower than the calculated value of s√2 (1.43), showed that none of these factors had a significant influence on the analytical response. The method was applied to samples of the reference medicine Plaquinol® 400 mg and similar Reuquinol 400 mg, nomenclature established by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), law no. 978 of 10 February 1999, purchased from local pharmacies. Results showed advantages and benefits in relation to the official method and those reported in the literature. The application of the multivariate strategy, the choice of methanol, in a lower proportion in the organic phase, due to its low toxicity, economy and easier availability compared to acetonitrile, and the other organic solvents used was a promising and important alternative for the analytical method. Furthermore, the use of reversed stationary phase, common in quality control laboratories, provided an analyte retention time of 4.595 min, demonstrating good performance and speed in routine analyses.
Q3

A vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction followed by dispersive-solid phase extraction (VA-LLE/d-SPE) for the determination of eight benzoylphenylureas insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers
Alhamami M.A., Algethami J.S., Ramadan M.F., Abdallah O.I.
AbstractMonitoring benzoylphenylureas (BPUs) residues in ready-to-eat vegetables is of great interest for an adequate assessment of human pesticide exposure. A rapid, inexpensive, simple, and effective method for determining 8 BPUs insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers was developed and validated. Vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction (VA-LLE) followed by dispersive solid-phase extraction (d-SPE) using graphitized carbon black (GCB) for cleanup was used before LC-MS/MS analysis. Different parameters were optimized, including the type and volume of extractants, vortex time, and the type and amount of adsorbents used for cleanup. The evaluation showed that the method has excellent linearity (R2 ≥ 0.994). The recovered 8 BPUs insecticides from spiked tomato and cucumber samples at 0.01, 0.05, and 0.25 mg kg−1 ranged from 83.2 to 105.2%, with RSD of 4.9–14.6%. The limits of quantitation (LOQs) were 0.0025 mg kg−1 (0.005 mg kg−1 for lufenuron). Within-day repeatability ranged from 3.9 to 13.9%, while between-day repeatability ranged from 8.9% to 17.7%. The optimized method was used to analyze 100 samples of tomatoes and cucumbers marketed in Saudi Arabia.
Q3

Headspace – Solid phase microextraction vs liquid injection GC-MS analysis of essential oils: Prediction of linear retention indices by multiple linear regression
Hristozova A., Batmazyan M., Simitchiev K., Tsoneva S., Kmetov V., Rosenberg E.
AbstractDue to the relative independence from the operational parameters, the linear retention indices (LRIs) are useful tool in gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) qualitative analysis. The aim of the current study was to develop a multiple linear regression (MLR) model for the prediction of LRIs as a function of selected molecular descriptors. Liquid injection GC-MS was used for the analysis of Essential oils (Rose, Lavender and Peppermint) separating the ingredients by a semi-standard non-polar stationary phase. As a result, a sum of 103 compounds were identified and their experimental LRIs were derived relying on reference measurements of a standard mixture of n-alkanes (from C8 to C20). As a next step, a set of molecular descriptors was generated for the distinguished chemical structures. Further, a stepwise MLR was applied for the selection of the significant descriptors (variables) which can be used to predict the LRIs. From an exploit set of over 2000 molecular descriptors, it was found that only 16 can be regarded as significant and independent variables. At this point split validation was applied: the identified compounds were randomly divided into training (85%) and validation (15%) sets. The training set (87 compounds) was used to derive two MLR models by applying i) the ‘enter’ algorithm (R2 = 0.9960, RMSЕ = 17) and ii) the ‘stepwise’ one (R2 = 0.9958, RMSЕ = 17). The predictive power was assessed by the validation set (16 compounds) as follows i) q2F1 = 0.9896, RMSE = 25 and ii) q2F1 = 0.9886, RMSE = 26, respectively. The adequateness of both regression approaches was further evaluated. Newly developed headspace-solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) procedures in combination with GC-MS were used for an alternative analysis of the studied Essential oils. Twelve additional compounds, not previously detected by the liquid sample introduction mode of analysis, were identified for which the values of the significant descriptors were within the working range of the developed MLRs. For the last compounds, the LRIs were calculated and the experimental data was used as an external set for assessment of the regression models. The predictive power for both regression approaches was assessed as follows: Enter RMSE = 41, q2F2 = 0.9503 and Stepwise RMSE = 40, q2F2 = 0.9521.
Q3

Development and validation of an analytical method for acetamiprid determination in plant protection products using HPLC-DAD
Marczewska P., Rolnik J., Stobiecki T., Sajewicz M.
AbstractPlant protection products (PPP), crucial for agricultural production, are experiencing increased global demand, particularly with the growing need for food production. To meet this demand, robust analytical methods are essential for confirming the presence and determining active substance concentrations in PPP. This study introduces an analytical method utilizing high-performance liquid chromatography with a diode array detector (HPLC-DAD) for determination of acetamiprid in water-soluble powder formulations. The method, validated according to SANCO/3030/99 rev.5, demonstrated exhibited adequate accuracy and precision, with repeatability expressed as the ratio of the standard deviation (% RSD) to the relative standard deviation (% RSDr) being lower than 1. Recoveries for the active substance at concentrations above 10% ranged from 97% to 103%. The developed method is also characterized by suitable linearity, confirmed by a correlation coefficient >0.99. Specific chromatographic profiles were generated, and acetamiprid content in 180 formulations was analyzed, including reference products. The developed method aligns with “green chemistry” principles, minimizing solvent use and emphasizing energy efficiency. Overall, it offers a comprehensive approach for qualitative and quantitative analysis, ensuring the reliability of PPP quality control.
Q3

Analytical and numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear chromatography column models
Kaczmarski K., Szukiewicz M.K.
AbstractThe advection-convection models (ACM) have practical applications in the investigation of separation processes, where mass (heat) is transferred by convection and diffusion (dispersion) along mass/heat exchanger, eq. adsorption, chromatography column, tubular reactor, etc. The ACM consists of nonlinear partial differential equations which can be solved only with numerical methods. In the article, a comparison of the volume method (VM) and orthogonal collocation on finite elements (OCFE) is presented in terms of their reliability, accuracy of calculations, and speed of calculation. The OCFE proved to be more robust than VM.The linear ACM model for the chromatography column has an analytical solution in the form of the equation for the number of theoretical plates (N). This equation is often applied in the interpretation and evaluation of model parameters. However, the versions of N equation published in the literature are not correct. The error can lead to significant imprecision for specific cases. Here, in the paper, the revised equations are presented and discussed for the most frequently used chromatography column models.
Q3

Methodology for high-performance liquid chromatography detection of latanoprost and latanoprost free acid
Jankowski A.M., Vardar C., Talarico M.V., Wuchte L., Byrne M.E.
AbstractA gradient high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed to determine the concentrations of latanoprost (LP) and latanoprost free acid (LPA) in aqueous solutions. It is novel due to a combination of its simplicity, speed, and detection capability in aqueous solutions for both active drug (LPA) and prodrug (LP). This method is applicable for the research and development of novel drug delivery devices and quality control assays for experimental and commercial laboratory settings, as it allows for a high sample throughput. Samples were chromatographed across a C18 + 2.7 µm 4.6 × 7.5 mm reversed-phase column with gradient elution using a mobile phase of aqueous acetic acid (pH 3.1) and acetonitrile with 0.1% acetic acid. UV spectrophotometry was used to monitor the eluents at 210 nm. Drug concentrations from 1.0 to 150 μg mL−1 were tested, with good linearity observed across the range. LPA had a signature peak at approximately 4.82 min (SD < 0.08) and LP at 9.27 min (SD < 0.07). For both drug and pro-drug, LOD and LOQ were 1.0 and 2.5 μg mL−1, respectively. This assay which accurately measures both prodrug and drug in a single injection, has significant applicability in determining the release kinetics of novel LP drug delivery systems.
Q3

Identification and structural characterization of potential degradation products of baricitinib using liquid chromatography combined with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry
Kakouri E., Gkountanas K., Kanakis C., Tarantilis P.A., Dotsikas Y.
AbstractBaricitinib (BRT) is a drug substance with potent anti-inflammatory activity indicated in rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, severe alopecia areata and recently for the treatment of Covid-19. Process impurities of the drug during its formulation are quite known, however studies regarding its degradation products (DPs) under stress conditions are limited. In this study, the drug was subjected to forced degradation under various degradation conditions, including acidic hydrolysis, alkaline hydrolysis, oxidative and thermal, to determine its inherent stability. To this purpose, a novel HPLC method was developed for the determination of degradation impurities of BRT. Alkaline hydrolysis test showed a selectivity towards breaking C–C bonds. This resulted to five DPs formed by chain scission reactions occurred at the pyrrolo-pyrimidine group between C6–C10 and C8–C9. Also, the ethylsulfonyl-azetidin-ylidene group was subjected to C–C bond cleavage at C12–C15 and C16–C18. Degradation products were further characterized with the use of liquid chromatography quadrupole time of flight tandem mass spectrometry (LC-Q-TOF-MS/MS).
Q3

Development and validation of a quantitative minilab system for quality evaluation of selected medicines: Albendazole, arthemether-lumefantrine combination (Co-artem®), and mebendazole finished pharmaceutical products
Hasen G., Birhane W., Suleman S., Ashenef A.
AbstractThe current technologies for substandard and counterfeit drug detection are either too expensive for low-resource settings or only provide qualitative or semi-quantitative results. GPHF minilab™ is one of them based on thin layer chromatography(TLC) principles with a semi-quantitative capability by visual observation of the spot area and intensity for medicine quality analysis. Thus, its use as a quality control tool for pharmaceutical products has limitations as spot area and intensity visual observation by the naked eye highly varies from analyst to analyst. As such, in this study, the semi-quantitative technique has been transferred to a quantitative approach by capturing the developed TLC plate image using an Android-based mobile phone inside a simple carton box. Then, the spot area was quantified using justTLC software. The quantitative results were compared with the-high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method as the golden standard. Accordingly, linearity was observed in the assayed range (80–120% label claim), and the correlation coefficients found were (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956 for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively.). The values are satisfactory. The %RSDs found were less than 2% for all drugs [intraday (n = 6) (RSD = 1.17, 1.61, 1.87, and 1.64), and interday (n = 18) (RSD = 1.16, 0.72, 1.12, and 1.18) for Artemether, Lumefantrine, Mebendazole, and Albendazole, respectively]. Moreover, comparisons of results obtained from the sophisticated CAMAG UV cabinet (R2 =0.991, 0.971, 0.946, and 0.967) and the developed simple carton box (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956) for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively. The values are comparable and reveal the accuracy of the method. Robustness testings' that were performed under different altered conditions revealed the robustness of the method (RSD less than 2% for all factors). Additionally the deviations from the golden HPLC results were on average −8.62% for albendazole, −3.79% for artemether, and −4.52% for lumefantrine samples. The developed method shows a satisfactory performance capability to utilize the GPHF minilab™ as a quantitative technique for medicine quality control purposes. It will be a very useful tool in a resource-limited setting. The target method profile, which encompasses a simple, low-cost, linear, precise, robust, accurate, and quantitative GPHF minilab™ system, was obtained for Albendazole, Mebendazole, and Arthemeter lumefantine combinations (Co-artem). The proposed method was successfully applied to analyze the content of the marketed medicines in the above mentioned tablets and offered acceptable deviations from the golden HPLC method. Automation of quantitative GPHF minilab™ was highly recommended to enhance the appropriateness and use of this system.
Q3

Validation of HPLC-DAD method for analysis of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in liquid oral formulations and its application to forced degradation study
Mikulić M., Sazdanić D., Kladar N., Radulović J., Srđenović Čonić B., Atanacković Krstonošić M.
AbstractDue to the frequent use of paracetamol formulations, it is useful to develop an analytical technique for the determination of intact paracetamol in presence of other drugs and excipients or the degradation products. In this study, a simple, isocratic, fast, specific, accurate and precise stability-indicating high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed and validated for simultaneous quantitative determination of paracetamol (PCM) and potassium sorbate (PS) in oral liquid formulations. The chromatographic separation was achieved on Zorbax SB C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) with Zorbax SB C18 precolumn (12.5 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) using distilled water pH 2 with ortho-phosphoric acid and acetonitrile (70:30, v/v) as a mobile phase, and UV detection at 235 nm. The temperature of the column was kept constant at 25 °C. The method was validated according to International Conference on harmonization (ICH) guidelines. The method demonstrated excellent linearity, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9996 and 0.9998 for PCM and PS, respectively, over the concentration ranges of 10–600 μg mL−1 (PCM) and 6–500 μg mL−1 (PS). The retention time was found to be 1.98 and 4.86 min for PCM and PS, respectively. Oral liquid formulation samples were subjected to various stress conditions (acidic and alkaline hydrolysis, as well as oxidative, heat and photolytic degradation) for the purpose of forced degradation study. The major degradation of paracetamol was achieved in acidic and basic stress conditions, while thermal and photolytic degradation generally had the least influence. On the other hand, potassium sorbate was highly susceptible to photolytic degradation. It was also shown that the formulation has strong influence on stability of tested compounds. Forced degradation studies demonstrated the stability-indicating power of the method and can be used to assess the stability of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in oral liquid formulations.
Q3

A simple, rapid, and green method for determination of three cholic acids in bio-transformed Jindanfen by HPLC-MS
Qian Z., Huang Q., Wang F., Lei Q., He Z., Wu Q., Wu M., Gao J.
AbstractA simple, rapid, and green high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) method was developed for determination of tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA), taurocholic acid (TCA), and taurochenodeoxycholic acid (TCDCA) in bio-transformed Jindanfen (BTJDF), which is obtained from chicken bile through a bioconversion process. The sample was prepared using water. The HPLC separation was operated on a poroshell 120 EC-C18 column with a 2.0 min gradient elution procedure. Detection was performed on a single quadrupole mass spectrometer in negative mode with selected ion monitoring mode (SIM). This developed HPLC-MS method presented good linearity (r > 0.997) and sensitivity (limit of quantification, 30.0–80.0 pg) for three analytes. The relative standard deviations (RSDs) for precision, repeatability, and stability were all below 3.00%. The matrix effects and average recoveries of three analytes were 91.2–97.9% (RSDs < 1.50%) and 95.4–103% (RSDs < 3.00%), respectively. The average contents of TUDCA, TCA, and TCDCA in ten batches of samples were 33.8, 13.2, and 20.5%, respectively. Finally, the greenness of the developed method was validated by Analytical Eco-Scale and Complex-GAPI. The developed method was proved to be an eco-friendly, effective, and reliable approach for assaying the three cholic acids in BTJDF, which is help to improve the quality evaluation level of the BTJDF industry.
Q3

Development of an HPLC-UV method for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts
Ceylan B., Kepekci Tekkeli S.E.
AbstractA simple, fast and selective analytical method has been developed for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts. The proposed method depends on reversed-phase liquid chromatography with isocratic flow profile of the mobile phase composed of acetonitrile–10 mM phosphoric acid (pH 2.5) (85:15, v/v), with a C18 column at 30 °C. The analytes were detected with UV–vis. detector at 210 nm. The injection volume was 20 μL. The linearity ranges were found to be 0.2–20 and 0.1–10 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. LOD values were found to be 0.07 μg mL−1 and 0.03 μg mL−1, LOQ values were found to be 0.2 and 0.1 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. No interference was observed from concomitants. The developed method was applied to the analysis of 10 different type cosmetic products. It is foreseen that the method will be able to be used in order to carry out routine analysis, quality control and standardization in cosmetic products containing allantoin and D-panthenol.
Q3

DoE-empowered development and validation of an environmentally sustainable RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of antihypertensive drugs: AQbD perspective
Gopalaiah S.B., Jayaseelan K.
AbstractThe primary objective of the present inquiry is to formulate a sustainable method employing Reverse Phase-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) for determination of Amlodipine (AM) and Irbesartan (IRB) simultaneously, compounds commonly prescribed for hypertension treatment. Existing literature underscores the absence of a comprehensive method in this regard. This research endeavors to align with the tenets of green chemistry by seamlessly integrating Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) with RP-HPLC, replacing environmentally hazardous chemical modifiers with eco-friendly solvents. Identifying the critical variables as the 70% ethanol level and flow rate, a central composite design is applied for optimization. The separation is achieved utilizing a Phenomenex Luna column (C18, 250 mm × 4.6 mm i.d, 5 μm) with a mobile phase comprising ethanol and 0.1 % o-phosphoric acid in a 70:30 v/v ratio, flowing at 0.8 mL min−1, and detection wavelength of 242 nm. Green assessment methodologies are implemented to gauge the adherence of the proposed RP-HPLC method to eco-friendly principles while ensuring efficiency in chromatographic performance. The current developed method is rapid with retention time of 2.3 and 3.3 min for AM and IRB respectively and having a wide linear range from 55 to 130 μg mL−1, which makes the suitable for the accurate quantification of AM and IRB simultaneously in bulk and tablet dosage form, there by minimize environmental impact by providing a conscientious choice for the routine analysis which is achieved through the amalgamation of AQbD with a sustainable approach.
Q3

The effect of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on the removal of cypermethrin and spirotetramat residues in apples
Suyabatmaz A.M., Yakar Y.
AbstractThe simplest way to remove pesticide residues from fruits and vegetables is to wash them with tap water. However, this method is not effective enough. In this study, the effectiveness of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on pesticide removal was investigated. For this purpose firstly, apples were soaked in a cypermethrin (CYP) and spirotetramat (SPI) solution, which are frequently used as insecticides. Subsequently, the apples were washed in solutions prepared with vinegar, lemon juice, and baking soda at different concentrations (0.5%, 1% and 2%) and assisted by ultrasound (2.5–5 min). The residues in the medicated and washed samples were analysed on an LC-MS/MS instrument after extraction using the QuEChERS extraction method. The results of the analysis showed that acidic vinegar and lemon juice were more effective than baking soda. Moreover, the application of ultrasound significantly increased this effect. When a 0.5% vinegar solution was assisted by ultrasound, 62% of the cypermethrin residue was removed and 82% of the spirotetramat residue was removed. These values were 51.5% and 49.6% higher than tap water, respectively. In conclusion, acidic solutions such as vinegar, which we can easily prepare at home, are highly effective in removing pesticide residues when assisted by ultrasound.
Top-100
Citing journals
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
|
|
International Journal of Acarology
2815 citations, 21.69%
|
|
Zootaxa
1125 citations, 8.67%
|
|
Experimental and Applied Acarology
1023 citations, 7.88%
|
|
ZooKeys
205 citations, 1.58%
|
|
Insects
166 citations, 1.28%
|
|
Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases
155 citations, 1.19%
|
|
Journal of Natural History
147 citations, 1.13%
|
|
Annales Zoologici
129 citations, 0.99%
|
|
Biological Control
128 citations, 0.99%
|
|
Biologia (Poland)
128 citations, 0.99%
|
|
Journal of Medical Entomology
115 citations, 0.89%
|
|
Annals of the Entomological Society of America
108 citations, 0.83%
|
|
Diversity
99 citations, 0.76%
|
|
Systematic Parasitology
98 citations, 0.76%
|
|
Acarina
97 citations, 0.75%
|
|
PLoS ONE
94 citations, 0.72%
|
|
Journal of Economic Entomology
92 citations, 0.71%
|
|
Pest Management Science
88 citations, 0.68%
|
|
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science
83 citations, 0.64%
|
|
Biota Neotropica
75 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Parasites and Vectors
73 citations, 0.56%
|
|
Scientific Reports
71 citations, 0.55%
|
|
Journal of Apicultural Research
67 citations, 0.52%
|
|
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology
66 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Australian Journal of Entomology
66 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Bulletin of Entomological Research
64 citations, 0.49%
|
|
Animals
63 citations, 0.49%
|
|
Environmental Entomology
61 citations, 0.47%
|
|
Crop Protection
61 citations, 0.47%
|
|
Parasitology Research
56 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Zoosymposia
56 citations, 0.43%
|
|
Veterinary Parasitology
55 citations, 0.42%
|
|
BioControl
54 citations, 0.42%
|
|
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
53 citations, 0.41%
|
|
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia
52 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Invertebrate Systematics
49 citations, 0.38%
|
|
Journal of the Acarological Society of Japan
48 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection
47 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Annual Review of Entomology
46 citations, 0.35%
|
|
Apidologie
44 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica
43 citations, 0.33%
|
|
European Zoological Journal
43 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Applied Entomology and Zoology
42 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Journal of Parasitology
42 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Biocontrol Science and Technology
40 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Phytoparasitica
39 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology
37 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Acta Parasitologica
36 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Journal of Pest Science
36 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Arthropod Structure and Development
36 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Journal of Applied Entomology
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Acarologia
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Canadian Entomologist
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Soft Scale Insects their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Florida Entomologist
34 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
34 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Medical and Veterinary Entomology
32 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Parasitology
31 citations, 0.24%
|
|
PeerJ
30 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Entomological Review
30 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Canadian Journal of Zoology
30 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Journal of Stored Products Research
29 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Neotropical Entomology
29 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Species Diversity
29 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports
28 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Journal of Insect Science
28 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Systematics and Biodiversity
27 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Acta Tropica
26 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Frontiers in Plant Science
25 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Brazilian Journal of Biology
24 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Polar Biology
24 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Ecology and Evolution
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Agronomy
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
EFSA Journal
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Plants
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Zoologischer Anzeiger
22 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Pathogens
22 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Heliyon
22 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Journal of Chemical Ecology
21 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Entomological Science
21 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology
20 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Morphology
20 citations, 0.15%
|
|
International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife
19 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Biological Reviews
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Pedobiologia
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinaria
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Biodiversity and Conservation
17 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Plant Protection Science
17 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Insect Physiology
17 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Comparative Physiology B: Biochemical, Systemic, and Environmental Physiology
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Entomological Research
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Entomology
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Industrial Crops and Products
15 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Oecologia
15 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Forests
15 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
|
Citing publishers
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
|
Taylor & Francis
3341 citations, 25.74%
|
|
Springer Nature
2198 citations, 16.94%
|
|
Elsevier
1195 citations, 9.21%
|
|
Magnolia Press
1191 citations, 9.18%
|
|
Wiley
724 citations, 5.58%
|
|
MDPI
542 citations, 4.18%
|
|
Oxford University Press
366 citations, 2.82%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
230 citations, 1.77%
|
|
Pensoft Publishers
227 citations, 1.75%
|
|
Entomological Society of America
169 citations, 1.3%
|
|
SciELO
137 citations, 1.06%
|
|
115 citations, 0.89%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
107 citations, 0.82%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
100 citations, 0.77%
|
|
Tyumen State University
97 citations, 0.75%
|
|
CSIRO Publishing
61 citations, 0.47%
|
|
57 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Annual Reviews
49 citations, 0.38%
|
|
The Acarological Society of Japan
49 citations, 0.38%
|
|
Akademiai Kiado
47 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Pleiades Publishing
42 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Canadian Science Publishing
37 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Les Amis d'Acarologia
36 citations, 0.28%
|
|
American Society of Parasitology
36 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Florida Entomologist Society
35 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
34 citations, 0.26%
|
|
PeerJ
31 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Japanese Society of Systematic Zoology
29 citations, 0.22%
|
|
EDP Sciences
23 citations, 0.18%
|
|
21 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences
20 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
20 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Science Alert
20 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
18 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Japanese Society of Applied Entomology and Zoology
17 citations, 0.13%
|
|
The Royal Society
16 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Arachnological Society of Japan
15 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Academia Brasileira de Ciencias
14 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Museum and Institute of Zoology at the Polish Academy of Sciences
14 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
13 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Entomological Society of Turkey
13 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Entomological Society of Washington
13 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Southwestern Entomological Society
13 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
13 citations, 0.1%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
12 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Georgia Entomological Society, Inc.
12 citations, 0.09%
|
|
King Saud University
11 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
11 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Association of Zoo Veterinarians
11 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Acta Zoologica Hungarica
11 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Scientific Societies
11 citations, 0.08%
|
|
The Company of Biologists
10 citations, 0.08%
|
|
SAGE
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
American Society for Microbiology
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
The Russian Academy of Sciences
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR)e
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Academy of Science of South Africa
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
IntechOpen
9 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
8 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France
8 citations, 0.06%
|
|
American Arachnological Society
8 citations, 0.06%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
International Society for Horticultural Science (ISHS)
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics (NAS Ukraine)
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Korean Society of Applied Entomology
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Society of Parasitologists
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature
7 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Inter-Research Science Center
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Instituto de Ecologia, A.C.
6 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Asian Network for Scientific Information
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Fundacao Zoobotanica do Rio Grande
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
IOP Publishing
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Veterinary World
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Zoological Society of Japan
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Akademizdatcenter Nauka
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences
5 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Wageningen Academic Publishers
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Association of Avian Pathologists Inc.
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Wildlife Disease Association
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
National Library of Serbia
4 citations, 0.03%
|
|
University of California Press
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Microbiology Society
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Fundacao Oswaldo Cruz
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Korean Society for Parasitology
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Tecnologia Agraria y Alimentaria
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Entomological Society
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Korean Biodiversity Information Facility
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB)
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Florestas
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Instituto de Tecnologia do Parana
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Academic Journals
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Publications Office of the European Union
3 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
|
Publishing organizations
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
|
|
University of Tyumen
92 publications, 3.6%
|
|
Universidade Estadual Paulista
57 publications, 2.23%
|
|
University of Tehran
49 publications, 1.91%
|
|
Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
40 publications, 1.56%
|
|
North-West University
37 publications, 1.45%
|
|
University of Michigan
34 publications, 1.33%
|
|
University of California, Riverside
31 publications, 1.21%
|
|
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
29 publications, 1.13%
|
|
Guizhou University
28 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Agricultural University of Athens
28 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Bu-Ali Sina University
25 publications, 0.98%
|
|
Tarbiat Modares University
24 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Guangxi University
22 publications, 0.86%
|
|
Ibaraki University
22 publications, 0.86%
|
|
Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
21 publications, 0.82%
|
|
Oregon State University
20 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Ankara University
17 publications, 0.66%
|
|
University of Guilan
17 publications, 0.66%
|
|
Ohio State University
17 publications, 0.66%
|
|
University of Graz
17 publications, 0.66%
|
|
University of Toronto
16 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Queensland Museum
15 publications, 0.59%
|
|
University of Florida
15 publications, 0.59%
|
|
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
15 publications, 0.59%
|
|
King Saud University
14 publications, 0.55%
|
|
University of Maragheh
14 publications, 0.55%
|
|
Nanjing Agricultural University
14 publications, 0.55%
|
|
Washington State University
13 publications, 0.51%
|
|
West Virginia University
13 publications, 0.51%
|
|
National University of Mongolia
13 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Lorestan University
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Radboud University Nijmegen
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Bari Aldo Moro
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Queensland
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Connecticut
12 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Ataturk University
11 publications, 0.43%
|
|
Cukurova University
11 publications, 0.43%
|
|
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
11 publications, 0.43%
|
|
University of Life Sciences in Poznań
11 publications, 0.43%
|
|
A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences
10 publications, 0.39%
|
|
Agricultural Research Education and Extension Organization
10 publications, 0.39%
|
|
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
10 publications, 0.39%
|
|
University of Amsterdam
10 publications, 0.39%
|
|
Nikitsky Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences
9 publications, 0.35%
|
|
Punjab Agricultural University
9 publications, 0.35%
|
|
University of Auckland
9 publications, 0.35%
|
|
National Autonomous University of Mexico
9 publications, 0.35%
|
|
University of Navarra
9 publications, 0.35%
|
|
Shiraz University
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Islamic Azad University, Tehran
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Hebei Normal University
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Wannan Medical College
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Cairo University
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
University of the Free State
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Hosei University
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Federal University of Goiás
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Warsaw University of Life Sciences
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
University of Alberta
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Louisiana State University at Eunice
8 publications, 0.31%
|
|
Shahrood University of technology
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
Razi University
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
Southwest University
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
Joint Russian-Vietnamese Tropical Research and Technological Center
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
University of Innsbruck
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
William & Mary
7 publications, 0.27%
|
|
University of Tabriz
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Bursa Uludağ University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Manisa Celal Bayar University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Aydın Adnan Menderes University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Shahrekord University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Nanchang University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Nanning Normal University
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Naturalis Biodiversity Center
6 publications, 0.23%
|
|
Tomsk State University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Indian Veterinary Research Institute
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Shahed University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Florida State University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Yale University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Anshun University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
University of the Witwatersrand
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Agricultural Research Council of South Africa
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
University of the Philippines Los Baños
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Hokkaido University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
University of Maryland, College Park
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Brigham Young University
5 publications, 0.2%
|
|
Lomonosov Moscow State University
4 publications, 0.16%
|
|
Ilia State University
4 publications, 0.16%
|
|
Erciyes University
4 publications, 0.16%
|
|
Takestan Islamic Azad University
4 publications, 0.16%
|
|
Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
4 publications, 0.16%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
|
University of Tyumen
51 publications, 12.78%
|
|
Universidade Estadual Paulista
23 publications, 5.76%
|
|
Guizhou University
20 publications, 5.01%
|
|
Guangxi University
13 publications, 3.26%
|
|
University of Tehran
12 publications, 3.01%
|
|
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya
10 publications, 2.51%
|
|
Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
9 publications, 2.26%
|
|
Wannan Medical College
8 publications, 2.01%
|
|
University of Guilan
7 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Hebei Normal University
7 publications, 1.75%
|
|
A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences
6 publications, 1.5%
|
|
King Saud University
6 publications, 1.5%
|
|
Cukurova University
6 publications, 1.5%
|
|
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
6 publications, 1.5%
|
|
Naturalis Biodiversity Center
6 publications, 1.5%
|
|
Tomsk State University
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Agricultural Research Education and Extension Organization
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Lorestan University
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Anshun University
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
University of Bari Aldo Moro
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
University of Michigan
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Nanning Normal University
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Hosei University
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro
5 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Lomonosov Moscow State University
4 publications, 1%
|
|
Tarbiat Modares University
4 publications, 1%
|
|
Shahrood University of technology
4 publications, 1%
|
|
Aydın Adnan Menderes University
4 publications, 1%
|
|
North-West University
4 publications, 1%
|
|
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
4 publications, 1%
|
|
University of Graz
4 publications, 1%
|
|
Federal University of Goiás
4 publications, 1%
|
|
National University of Mongolia
4 publications, 1%
|
|
University of Life Sciences in Poznań
4 publications, 1%
|
|
All-Russian Institute of Plant Protection
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Kerala Agricultural University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Punjab Agricultural University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Shahed University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
University of Jiroft
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Charles University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Brawijaya University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Ohio State University
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Federal University of Pernambuco
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Joint Russian-Vietnamese Tropical Research and Technological Center
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Universidade Estadual de Campinas
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
3 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Institute of Water and Ecology Problems of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Tyumen State Medical University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Abdul Wali Khan University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Islamic Azad University, Tehran
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Ondokuz Mayis University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Erzincan Binali Yildirim University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Shahrekord University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of Zabol
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Central Agricultural University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Razi University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
West Bengal University of Animal and Fishery Sciences
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Hebei University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of Bergen
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Florida State University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Cairo University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of Queensland
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Stellenbosch University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of the Free State
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Gadjah Mada University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Konkuk University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Incheon National University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Kyoto University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Baoshan University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
De La Salle University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Széchenyi István University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Federal University of Uberlândia
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Moulay Ismail University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Saitama Medical University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Kagoshima University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Warsaw University of Life Sciences
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Valencia
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
University of Florida
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Spanish National Museum of Natural Sciences
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Al-Azhar University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Cadi Ayyad University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Ibn Zohr University
2 publications, 0.5%
|
|
Institute of Systematics and Ecology of Animals of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Kazan Federal University
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Northern (Arctic) Federal University
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Penza State University
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Laverov Federal Center of Integrated Arctic Research of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Khabarovsk Federal Research Center of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Federal Center for Toxicological, Radiation and Biological Safety
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Scientific and Practical Center of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus for Bioresources
1 publication, 0.25%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
Publishing countries
100
200
300
400
500
|
|
USA
|
USA, 500, 19.54%
USA
500 publications, 19.54%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 220, 8.6%
Brazil
220 publications, 8.6%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 184, 7.19%
Iran
184 publications, 7.19%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 152, 5.94%
Russia
152 publications, 5.94%
|
China
|
China, 141, 5.51%
China
141 publications, 5.51%
|
India
|
India, 93, 3.63%
India
93 publications, 3.63%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 91, 3.56%
Poland
91 publications, 3.56%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 90, 3.52%
Turkey
90 publications, 3.52%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 80, 3.13%
South Africa
80 publications, 3.13%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 71, 2.77%
Japan
71 publications, 2.77%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 62, 2.42%
Australia
62 publications, 2.42%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 49, 1.91%
Belgium
49 publications, 1.91%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 48, 1.88%
Canada
48 publications, 1.88%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 48, 1.88%
Netherlands
48 publications, 1.88%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 42, 1.64%
Germany
42 publications, 1.64%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 38, 1.48%
Egypt
38 publications, 1.48%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 37, 1.45%
Italy
37 publications, 1.45%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 35, 1.37%
Mexico
35 publications, 1.37%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 32, 1.25%
Spain
32 publications, 1.25%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 31, 1.21%
Greece
31 publications, 1.21%
|
France
|
France, 27, 1.06%
France
27 publications, 1.06%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 25, 0.98%
Austria
25 publications, 0.98%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 24, 0.94%
Argentina
24 publications, 0.94%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 22, 0.86%
Czech Republic
22 publications, 0.86%
|
Hungary
|
Hungary, 21, 0.82%
Hungary
21 publications, 0.82%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 20, 0.78%
New Zealand
20 publications, 0.78%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 19, 0.74%
Slovakia
19 publications, 0.74%
|
Ukraine
|
Ukraine, 17, 0.66%
Ukraine
17 publications, 0.66%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 16, 0.63%
Colombia
16 publications, 0.63%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 16, 0.63%
Saudi Arabia
16 publications, 0.63%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 13, 0.51%
United Kingdom
13 publications, 0.51%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 13, 0.51%
Vietnam
13 publications, 0.51%
|
Mongolia
|
Mongolia, 13, 0.51%
Mongolia
13 publications, 0.51%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 12, 0.47%
Republic of Korea
12 publications, 0.47%
|
Montenegro
|
Montenegro, 12, 0.47%
Montenegro
12 publications, 0.47%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 12, 0.47%
Chile
12 publications, 0.47%
|
Indonesia
|
Indonesia, 11, 0.43%
Indonesia
11 publications, 0.43%
|
Costa Rica
|
Costa Rica, 11, 0.43%
Costa Rica
11 publications, 0.43%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 11, 0.43%
Thailand
11 publications, 0.43%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 10, 0.39%
Pakistan
10 publications, 0.39%
|
Philippines
|
Philippines, 9, 0.35%
Philippines
9 publications, 0.35%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 8, 0.31%
Norway
8 publications, 0.31%
|
Bangladesh
|
Bangladesh, 7, 0.27%
Bangladesh
7 publications, 0.27%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 6, 0.23%
Israel
6 publications, 0.23%
|
Morocco
|
Morocco, 6, 0.23%
Morocco
6 publications, 0.23%
|
Benin
|
Benin, 5, 0.2%
Benin
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Georgia
|
Georgia, 5, 0.2%
Georgia
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Panama
|
Panama, 5, 0.2%
Panama
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 5, 0.2%
Serbia
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 5, 0.2%
Sweden
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Ecuador
|
Ecuador, 5, 0.2%
Ecuador
5 publications, 0.2%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 4, 0.16%
Kenya
4 publications, 0.16%
|
Cuba
|
Cuba, 4, 0.16%
Cuba
4 publications, 0.16%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 4, 0.16%
Nigeria
4 publications, 0.16%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 4, 0.16%
Switzerland
4 publications, 0.16%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 3, 0.12%
Portugal
3 publications, 0.12%
|
Malaysia
|
Malaysia, 3, 0.12%
Malaysia
3 publications, 0.12%
|
Peru
|
Peru, 3, 0.12%
Peru
3 publications, 0.12%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 3, 0.12%
Romania
3 publications, 0.12%
|
Venezuela
|
Venezuela, 2, 0.08%
Venezuela
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Guadeloupe
|
Guadeloupe, 2, 0.08%
Guadeloupe
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 2, 0.08%
Denmark
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Jordan
|
Jordan, 2, 0.08%
Jordan
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 2, 0.08%
Iraq
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 2, 0.08%
Cyprus
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Malta
|
Malta, 2, 0.08%
Malta
2 publications, 0.08%
|
New Caledonia
|
New Caledonia, 2, 0.08%
New Caledonia
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Syria
|
Syria, 2, 0.08%
Syria
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 2, 0.08%
Slovenia
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Tanzania
|
Tanzania, 2, 0.08%
Tanzania
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Uruguay
|
Uruguay, 2, 0.08%
Uruguay
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 2, 0.08%
Finland
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Svalbard and Jan Mayen
|
Svalbard and Jan Mayen, 2, 0.08%
Svalbard and Jan Mayen
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Sri Lanka
|
Sri Lanka, 2, 0.08%
Sri Lanka
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Czechoslovakia
|
Czechoslovakia, 2, 0.08%
Czechoslovakia
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Kazakhstan
|
Kazakhstan, 1, 0.04%
Kazakhstan
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Belarus
|
Belarus, 1, 0.04%
Belarus
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Azerbaijan
|
Azerbaijan, 1, 0.04%
Azerbaijan
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 1, 0.04%
Algeria
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Bolivia
|
Bolivia, 1, 0.04%
Bolivia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Botswana
|
Botswana, 1, 0.04%
Botswana
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Guatemala
|
Guatemala, 1, 0.04%
Guatemala
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Guam
|
Guam, 1, 0.04%
Guam
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Zimbabwe
|
Zimbabwe, 1, 0.04%
Zimbabwe
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 1, 0.04%
Ireland
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Yemen
|
Yemen, 1, 0.04%
Yemen
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Côte d'Ivoire
|
Côte d'Ivoire, 1, 0.04%
Côte d'Ivoire
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Mozambique
|
Mozambique, 1, 0.04%
Mozambique
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Nicaragua
|
Nicaragua, 1, 0.04%
Nicaragua
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 1, 0.04%
Singapore
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Uzbekistan
|
Uzbekistan, 1, 0.04%
Uzbekistan
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Ethiopia
|
Ethiopia, 1, 0.04%
Ethiopia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
USSR
|
USSR, 1, 0.04%
USSR
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Show all (63 more) | |
100
200
300
400
500
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 68, 17.04%
Brazil
68 publications, 17.04%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 66, 16.54%
Russia
66 publications, 16.54%
|
China
|
China, 57, 14.29%
China
57 publications, 14.29%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 49, 12.28%
Iran
49 publications, 12.28%
|
USA
|
USA, 42, 10.53%
USA
42 publications, 10.53%
|
India
|
India, 42, 10.53%
India
42 publications, 10.53%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 24, 6.02%
Turkey
24 publications, 6.02%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 17, 4.26%
Egypt
17 publications, 4.26%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 14, 3.51%
Poland
14 publications, 3.51%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 12, 3.01%
Japan
12 publications, 3.01%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 11, 2.76%
Spain
11 publications, 2.76%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 10, 2.51%
South Africa
10 publications, 2.51%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 9, 2.26%
Germany
9 publications, 2.26%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 9, 2.26%
Netherlands
9 publications, 2.26%
|
Montenegro
|
Montenegro, 9, 2.26%
Montenegro
9 publications, 2.26%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 8, 2.01%
Italy
8 publications, 2.01%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 8, 2.01%
Saudi Arabia
8 publications, 2.01%
|
Hungary
|
Hungary, 7, 1.75%
Hungary
7 publications, 1.75%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 7, 1.75%
Czech Republic
7 publications, 1.75%
|
Indonesia
|
Indonesia, 6, 1.5%
Indonesia
6 publications, 1.5%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 6, 1.5%
Republic of Korea
6 publications, 1.5%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 5, 1.25%
Vietnam
5 publications, 1.25%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 5, 1.25%
Colombia
5 publications, 1.25%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 5, 1.25%
Mexico
5 publications, 1.25%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 4, 1%
Australia
4 publications, 1%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 4, 1%
Austria
4 publications, 1%
|
Morocco
|
Morocco, 4, 1%
Morocco
4 publications, 1%
|
Mongolia
|
Mongolia, 4, 1%
Mongolia
4 publications, 1%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 4, 1%
Pakistan
4 publications, 1%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 4, 1%
Slovakia
4 publications, 1%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 4, 1%
Chile
4 publications, 1%
|
France
|
France, 3, 0.75%
France
3 publications, 0.75%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 3, 0.75%
Argentina
3 publications, 0.75%
|
Philippines
|
Philippines, 3, 0.75%
Philippines
3 publications, 0.75%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 2, 0.5%
Belgium
2 publications, 0.5%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 2, 0.5%
United Kingdom
2 publications, 0.5%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 2, 0.5%
Canada
2 publications, 0.5%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 2, 0.5%
New Zealand
2 publications, 0.5%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 2, 0.5%
Norway
2 publications, 0.5%
|
Peru
|
Peru, 2, 0.5%
Peru
2 publications, 0.5%
|
Ecuador
|
Ecuador, 2, 0.5%
Ecuador
2 publications, 0.5%
|
Ukraine
|
Ukraine, 1, 0.25%
Ukraine
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Belarus
|
Belarus, 1, 0.25%
Belarus
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Azerbaijan
|
Azerbaijan, 1, 0.25%
Azerbaijan
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 1, 0.25%
Algeria
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Bangladesh
|
Bangladesh, 1, 0.25%
Bangladesh
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Benin
|
Benin, 1, 0.25%
Benin
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Bolivia
|
Bolivia, 1, 0.25%
Bolivia
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Guatemala
|
Guatemala, 1, 0.25%
Guatemala
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 1, 0.25%
Greece
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 1, 0.25%
Israel
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 1, 0.25%
Iraq
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Côte d'Ivoire
|
Côte d'Ivoire, 1, 0.25%
Côte d'Ivoire
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Cuba
|
Cuba, 1, 0.25%
Cuba
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Malaysia
|
Malaysia, 1, 0.25%
Malaysia
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Mozambique
|
Mozambique, 1, 0.25%
Mozambique
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.25%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Nicaragua
|
Nicaragua, 1, 0.25%
Nicaragua
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 1, 0.25%
Romania
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 1, 0.25%
Serbia
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Syria
|
Syria, 1, 0.25%
Syria
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 1, 0.25%
Slovenia
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Uzbekistan
|
Uzbekistan, 1, 0.25%
Uzbekistan
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Uruguay
|
Uruguay, 1, 0.25%
Uruguay
1 publication, 0.25%
|
Show all (34 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|
1 profile journal article
Asbani Nur
7 publications,
7 citations
h-index: 2
1 profile journal article
KROVVIDI SUDHAKAR
25 publications,
99 citations
h-index: 6