Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 313

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Post-embryonic development in the ventral cord of Caenorhabditis elegans

Sulston, John Edward·1976·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences

Abstract

56 nerve cells are added to the ventral cord and associated ganglia of Caenorhabditis elegans at about the time of the first larval moult. These cells are produced by the uniform division of 13 neuroblasts followed by a defined pattern of cell deaths. Comparison with the data in the previous paper suggests that there is a relationship between the ancestry of a cell and its function. The significance of programmed cell death is discussed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.1976.0084

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 313

Metadata

Authors
Sulston, J. E.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences
Published
1976-08-10
Volume
275
Issue
938
Pages
287-297
ISSN
  • 0080-4622 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-0280
OpenAlex
W2047107948
Cited by
313
References
0
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Post-embryonic development in the ventral cord of Caenorhabditis elegans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.1976.0084
The paper
Sulston, J. E. (1976). Post-embryonic development in the ventral cord of Caenorhabditis elegans. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1976.0084

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.