In this study we examined the institutions (and countries) the Nobel laureates of the three disciplines chemistry, physics and physiology/medicine were affiliated with (from 1994 to 2014) when they did the decisive research work. To be able to frame the results at that time point, we also looked at when the Nobel laureates obtained their Ph.D./M.D. and when they were awarded the Nobel Prize. We examined all 155 Nobel laureates of the last 21 years in physics, chemistry, and physiology/medicine. Results showed that the USA dominated as a country. Statistical analysis also revealed that only three institutions can boast a larger number of Nobelists at all three time points examined: UC Berkeley, Columbia University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Researcher mobility analysis made clear that most of the Nobel laureates were mobile; either after having obtained their Ph.D./M.D. or after writing significant papers that were decisive for the Nobel Prize. Therefore, we distinguished different ways of mobility between countries and between institutions. In most cases, the researchers changed institutes/universities within one and the same country (in first position: the USA, followed, by far, by the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany).

In 2014, Thomson Reuters published a list of the most highly cited researchers worldwide (). Because the data are freely available for downloading and include the names of the researchers' institutions, we produced a ranking of the institutions on the basis of the number of highly cited researchers per institution. This ranking is intended to be a helpful amendment of other available institutional rankings

As a follow-up to the highly-cited authors list published by Thomson Reuters in June 2014, we analyze the top-1% most frequently cited papers published between 2002 and 2012 included in the Web of Science (WoS) subject category "Information Science & Library Science." 798 authors contributed to 305 top-1% publications; these authors were employed at 275 institutions. The authors at Harvard University contributed the largest number of papers, when the addresses are whole-number counted. However, Leiden University leads the ranking, if fractional counting is used.Twenty-three of the 798 authors were also listed as most highly-cited authors by Thomson Reuters in June 2014 (http://highlycited.com/). Twelve of these 23 authors were involved in publishing four or more of the 305 papers under study. Analysis of co-authorship relations among the 798 highly-cited scientists shows that co-authorships are based on common interests in a specific topic. Three topics were important between 2002 and 2012: (1) collection and exploitation of information in clinical practices, (2) the use of internet in public communication and commerce, and (3) scientometrics.

The journal FEMS Microbiology Letters covers all aspects of microbiology including virology. On which scientific shoulders do the papers published in this journal stand? Which are the classic papers used by the authors? We aim to answer these questions in this study by applying the Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (RPYS) analysis to all papers published in this journal between 1977 and 2017. In total, 16 837 publications with 410 586 cited references are analyzed. Mainly, the studies published in the journal FEMS Microbiology Letters draw knowledge from methods developed to quantify or characterize biochemical substances such as proteins, nucleic acids, lipids, or carbohydrates and from improvements of techniques suitable for studies of bacterial genetics. The techniques frequently used for studying the genetic of microorganisms in FEMS Microbiology Letters’ studies were developed using samples prepared from microorganisms. Methods required for the investigation of proteins, carbohydrates, or lipids were mostly transferred from other fields of life science to microbiology.

In 2014 Thomson Reuters (TR, provider of the Web of Science, WoS) published a list of highly-cited researchers worldwide. This includes those scientists who have published the most papers in their discipline which belong to the 1 % of the most-cited papers. Bornmann and Bauer (J Assoc Inf Sci Technol, in press) have presented a first evaluation in which the scientists are evaluated on the basis of their affiliations. In this short communication we would like to indicate how the TR data can be used to perform a meaningful country-specific evaluation. Germany serves as the example for the analysis.