The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Transplantation of living nuclei from blastula cells into enucleated frogs’ eggs
Open accessAbstract
The role of the nucleus in embryonic differentiation has been the subject of investigations dating back to the beginnings of experimental embryology. At first it was supposed by Roux, Weismann and others that differentiation is the result of qualitative nuclear divisions, different blastomeres thereby receiving the different kinds of nuclei which determine their subsequent differentiation. Later on this theory was disproved by numerous experiments showing that, during early cleavage at least, the distribution of the nuclei can be changed at will without altering the pattern of development. The cleavage nuclei have, therefore, been regarded as identical, and differentiation has been ascribed primarily to the well-known localizations in the egg cytoplasm. This evidence, it should be emphasized, relates only to the early phases of development. During this time it is definitely true that the nuclei in the various blastomeres are equivalent. However, whether they remain equivalent or become differentiated as the various parts of the embryo differentiate has never been tested. The possibility that nuclei might differentiate in response to regional differences in the cytoplasm, and that such nuclear changes might have reciprocal effects on the cytoplasm during cell differentiation, was suggested by Morgan.1 More recently Schultz2– 4 has discussed the problem more fully, indicating the known cytogenetical mechanisms that could account for nuclear differentiation, and Weisz5 has reviewed it in relation to ciliate morphogenesis. Obviously this problem can be solved only by the development of a method for testing directly whether nuclei of differentiating embryonic cells are or are not themselves differentiated. This sort of test could be obtained, as suggested to us several years ago by Schultz, if it were possible to transplant nuclei. Ideally, this type of experiment should be carried out by transplanting the nucleus …
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Direct conversion of fibroblasts to functional neurons by defined factors
Vierbuchen, T., Ostermeier, A., Pang, Z. P., Kokubu, Y., Südhof, T. C., & Wernig, M. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08797 · Cited by 3,017
Brown, D. D., & Dawid, I. B. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.160.3825.272 · Cited by 803
Human iPSC-based modeling of late-onset disease via progerin-induced aging
Miller, J. D., Ganat, Y. M., Kishinevsky, S., Bowman, R. L., Liu, B., Tu, E. Y., Mandal, P. K., Vera, E., Shim, J.-W., Kriks, S., et al. (2013) · Cell stem cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2013.11.006 · Cited by 777
Intracellular Delivery by Membrane Disruption: Mechanisms, Strategies, and Concepts
Stewart, M. P., Langer, R., & Jensen, K. F. (2018) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00678 · Cited by 747
Aging, Rejuvenation, and Epigenetic Reprogramming: Resetting the Aging Clock
Rando, T. A., & Chang, H. Y. (2012) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.003 · Cited by 520
Metadata
- Authors
- Briggs, R., & King, T. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1952-05
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 455-463
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2008905720
- Cited by
- 1,123
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transplantation of living nuclei from blastula cells into enucleated frogs’ eggs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.38.5.455
- The paper
- Briggs, R., & King, T. J. (1952). Transplantation of living nuclei from blastula cells into enucleated frogs’ eggs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.38.5.455
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.