Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A quantitative analysis of the effect of excision of the AER from the chick limb-bud

Summerbell, Dennis·1974·Development

Abstract

The effect of removal of the apical ectodermal ridge from the early chick limb-bud is re-examined using a new quantitative method of analysis of results. The concept of the proximo-distal sequence of laying down of parts is confirmed and evidence is presented that this proceeds as a continuous process, there being a gradual change in the level specified from one cell to another at a more distal level. The results are then interpreted in terms of the ‘progress zone’ model to show that they are both consistent with the model and that they provide an assay for one of its parameters, the rate of change of positional value with time at the tip.

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 · 10.1242/dev.32.3.651

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

Metadata

Authors
Summerbell, D.
Venue
Development
Published
1974-12-01
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
651-660
ISSN
  • 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9129
OpenAlex
W1904331578
Cited by
374
References
0
FWCI
2.30
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

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.