Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

257 \(\Rightarrow\) 151
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
257 \(\Rightarrow\) 260 Variations of Zorn's lemma, principles of cofinality, and Hausdorff's maximal principle, Part I and II, Harper, J. 1976, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic
260 \(\Rightarrow\) 40 Variations of Zorn's lemma, principles of cofinality, and Hausdorff's maximal principle, Part I and II, Harper, J. 1976, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic
40 \(\Rightarrow\) 231 Abzählbarkeit und Wohlordenbarkeit, Felgner, U. 1974, Comment. Math. Helv.
231 \(\Rightarrow\) 151 clear

Here are the links and statements of the form equivalence classes referenced above:

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
257:

\(Z(TR,P)\): Every transitive relation \((X,R)\) in which  every partially ordered subset has an upper bound, has a maximal element.

260:

\(Z(TR\&C,P)\): If \((X,R)\) is a transitive and connected relation in which every partially ordered subset has an upper bound, then \((X,R)\) has a maximal element.

40:

\(C(WO,\infty)\):  Every well orderable set of non-empty sets has a choice function. Moore, G. [1982], p 325.

231:

\(UT(WO,WO,WO)\): The union of a well ordered collection of well orderable sets is well orderable.

151:

\(UT(WO,\aleph_{0},WO)\) (\(U_{\aleph_{1}}\)): The union of a well ordered set of denumerable sets is well  orderable. (If \(\kappa\) is a well ordered cardinal, see note 27 for \(UT(WO,\kappa,WO)\).)

Comment:

Back