Christopher C. Ford

699 total citations
7 papers, 546 citations indexed

About

Christopher C. Ford is a scholar working on Molecular Biology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and Reproductive Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, Christopher C. Ford has authored 7 papers receiving a total of 546 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 5 papers in Molecular Biology, 2 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and 2 papers in Reproductive Medicine. Recurrent topics in Christopher C. Ford's work include DNA Repair Mechanisms (2 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (2 papers) and Renal and related cancers (2 papers). Christopher C. Ford is often cited by papers focused on DNA Repair Mechanisms (2 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (2 papers) and Renal and related cancers (2 papers). Christopher C. Ford collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and France. Christopher C. Ford's co-authors include Richard F. Cox, Christopher J. Hutchison, Robert M. Benbow, Robert Lafyatis, Jason A. Mills, Daniel J. Weiss, Lei Ying, Jyh‐Chang Jean, Paul Gadue and Deborah L. French and has published in prestigious journals such as The Journal of Cell Biology, Development and Genetics.

In The Last Decade

Christopher C. Ford

7 papers receiving 532 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Christopher C. Ford United Kingdom	7	435	88	84	62	50	7	546
Techuan Chan Japan	16	456 1.0×	107 1.2×	35 0.4×	60 1.0×	26 0.5×	20	522
Michelle Desler United States	15	808 1.9×	96 1.1×	55 0.7×	76 1.2×	42 0.8×	20	935
Christa Bode Germany	17	543 1.2×	182 2.1×	103 1.2×	73 1.2×	73 1.5×	23	855
Kuang‐Ming Hsiao Taiwan	15	601 1.4×	91 1.0×	61 0.7×	48 0.8×	25 0.5×	36	849
Emily Trimm United States	5	327 0.8×	113 1.3×	100 1.2×	40 0.6×	29 0.6×	6	543
Annie Wolff France	10	458 1.1×	63 0.7×	282 3.4×	75 1.2×	60 1.2×	11	616
Guizhong Cui China	12	608 1.4×	34 0.4×	81 1.0×	48 0.8×	36 0.7×	31	744
Megan S. Bodnar United States	5	542 1.2×	91 1.0×	23 0.3×	88 1.4×	38 0.8×	5	590
Gabriel A. Quinlan Australia	6	437 1.0×	76 0.9×	115 1.4×	59 1.0×	21 0.4×	8	489
Irène Aksoy France	11	571 1.3×	88 1.0×	51 0.6×	55 0.9×	19 0.4×	17	671

Countries citing papers authored by Christopher C. Ford

Since Specialization

Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Christopher C. Ford's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Christopher C. Ford with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Christopher C. Ford more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Christopher C. Ford

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Christopher C. Ford. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Christopher C. Ford. The network helps show where Christopher C. Ford may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Christopher C. Ford

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Christopher C. Ford. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Christopher C. Ford based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Christopher C. Ford. Christopher C. Ford is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

7 of 7 papers shown

1.

Somers, Aba, Jyh‐Chang Jean, Cesar Sommer, et al.. (2010). Generation of Transgene-Free Lung Disease-Specific Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Using a Single Excisable Lentiviral Stem Cell Cassette . Stem Cells. 28(10). 1728–1740. 307 indexed citations

2.

McCool, Jesse D., Christopher C. Ford, & Steven J. Sandler. (2004). A dnaT Mutant With Phenotypes Similar to Those of a priA2::kan Mutant in Escherichia coli K-12. Genetics. 167(2). 569–578. 35 indexed citations

3.

Jones, Rhiannon E., J. Ross Chapman, Chandrakala Puligilla, et al.. (2003). XRad17 Is Required for the Activation of XChk1 But Not XCds1 during Checkpoint Signaling inXenopus. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 14(9). 3898–3910. 23 indexed citations

4.

Pérez‐Mongiovi, Daniel, et al.. (2000). Nuclei and Microtubule Asters Stimulate Maturation/M Phase Promoting Factor (Mpf) Activation in Xenopus Eggs and Egg Cytoplasmic Extracts. The Journal of Cell Biology. 150(5). 963–974. 32 indexed citations

5.

Hutchison, Christopher J., Richard F. Cox, & Christopher C. Ford. (1988). The control of DNA replication in a cell-free extract that recapitulates a basic cell cycle in vitro. Development. 103(3). 553–566. 78 indexed citations

6.

Williams, Gwyn T., Sydney Shall, & Christopher C. Ford. (1983). NAD turnover during early development of Xenopus laevis. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research. 762(2). 272–280. 8 indexed citations

7.

Benbow, Robert M., et al.. (1975). Appearance of DNA polymerase activities during early development of Xenopus laevis. Developmental Biology. 43(1). 159–174. 63 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact