Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Injected nuclei in frog oocytes: fate, enlargement, and chromatin dispersal

Gurdon, J. B.·1976·Development

Abstract

A method is described by which nuclei associated with some cytoplasm can be rapidly prepared from a suspension of cells. The method involves the use of lysolecithin and bovine serum albumin. Oocytes of Xenopus laevis were injected with about 200 nuclei prepared from human HeLa cells by this method. Nuclei were deposited in oocyte cytoplasm, in the oocyte nucleus, or in the dispersed contents of a ruptured oocyte nucleus. Injected HeLa nuclei enlarge up to several hundred times in volume in the course of a few days. Their enlargement is associated with chromatin dispersion, increased binding of an acidic dye, and with the reduction in size, and eventual disappearance, of nucleoli. The amount of HeLa nucleus enlargement is much greater when the oocyte nucleus is ruptured. The fate of injected nuclei was followed by the use of HeLa nuclei whose DNA had been previously labelled with [3 H]thymidine. Labelled DNA does not pass from injected HeLa nuclei into the oocyte nucleus. Injected nuclei appear not to fuse with each other or with the oocyte nucleus. Nuclei prepared by the above method look morphologically healthy in oocytes cultured in vitro for up to one month after nuclear injection. Nuclei prepared by other methods, such as those involving the use of detergents, undergo deterioration within a few days after injection into oocytes.

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.36.3.523

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Gurdon, J. B.
Venue
Development
Published
1976-12-01
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
523-540
ISSN
  • 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9129
OpenAlex
W1902724244
Cited by
299
References
1
FWCI
3.71
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.