Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 448

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Uncrossed Visual Pathways of Hooded and Albino Rats

Lund, R. D.·1965·Science
DOI 10.1126/science.149.3691.1506
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The uncrossed visual pathways to the principal primary optic centers of hooded rats are substantially larger than those of albino rats. This provides an anatomical basis for the results of a recent study on behavior which showed differences in interocular transfer in the two varieties.

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 · 10.1126/science.149.3691.1506

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 448

Metadata

Authors
Lund, R. D.
Venue
Science
Publisher
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Published
1965-09-24
Volume
149
Issue
3691
Pages
1506-1507
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
DOI
10.1126/science.149.3691.1506
OpenAlex
W2086405623
Cited by
448
References
4
FWCI
5.45
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: Uncrossed Visual Pathways of Hooded and Albino Rats. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.149.3691.1506
The paper
Lund, R. D. (1965). Uncrossed Visual Pathways of Hooded and Albino Rats. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3691.1506

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.