There were errors published in Biology Open 2018 7: bio035394 doi:10.1242/bio.035394
Incorrect versions of Figure 2B and Figure S5B were used for the published version of this article.
The corrected figures are shown below.
cdc14 null males exhibit decreased sperm competition. (B) A control experiment was performed using white-eyed y w males for both the first and second males. A second control experiment was performed using red-eyed cdc14 null males for both the first and second males. The cdc14 null males are less competitive compared to control males regardless of whether they are the first or second male to mate. Results for a single representative replicates (n≥15 vials per cross) are shown. Additional data can be found in Fig. S5B. Data were analyzed using a Chi-squared test with Bonferroni correction. Six pairwise comparisons were made. Red-eyed control males were compared to the cdc14 null, rescue, or overexpression males; cdc14 null males were compared to rescue or overexpression male; and rescue males were compared to overexpression males. *P<0.009. ***P<0.0002.
cdc14 null males mate overnight at the same rate as controls. (B) Eye color of offspring from all replicates of the sperm competition assay. The proportion of offspring from cdc14 null males was significantly lower than the control (red). This decrease was rescued by expression of nos>myc-cdc14. Data were analyzed by Chi-squared test with Bonferroni correction. Control (red) was compared to the cdc14 null, rescue, and overexpression. The cdc14 null was compared to the rescue. *ρ<0.02, **ρ<0.003, ***ρ<0.0003. In (A) and (B), N≥48 vials aggregated in N≥3 experiments.
None of these errors affected the conclusions of the paper.
The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused by these changes.
- © 2018. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.
Article Navigation
Related articles
Cited by...
More in this TOC section
Similar articles
Other journals from The Company of Biologists
First person interview – Mary Salcedo
Have you seen our interviews with early-career first authors of our papers? In the latest issue, first author Mary Salcedo discusses her latest Methods and Techniques paper in which a newly created method geometrically analyses 789 insect wings.
Find out how Pamela Imperadore’s Travelling Fellowship grant from The Company of Biologists took her to Germany, where she used new imaging techniques to investigate the cellular machinery underlying octopus arm regeneration. Don’t miss the next application deadline for 2020 travel, coming up on 29 November. Where will your research take you?
On the cover, David Coppola, Brent Craven and their colleagues refute a widely-debated theory of olfactory coding first suggested by the Nobel Laureate Lord Adrian over half a century ago.
Biology Open has strong credentials and publishing with us is easy and fast. BiO aims to provide rapid publication for scientifically sound observations and valid conclusions in developmental, cell, experimental and translational biology. Submit your paper here – you’ll be in good company!
Recent cell science highlights in BiO – Masamitsu Sato and colleagues show that the conserved microtubule-associated protein CLASP facilitates bundling of spindle microtubules in early mitosis.
Transfer to Biology Open
If your submission to one of our sister journals, Development, Journal of Cell Science, Journal of Experimental Biology or Disease Models & Mechanisms, is unsuccessful, you can transfer your paper and any reviews directly to Biology Open. The majority of papers transferred with reviews are accepted for publication - find out more.
BiO joins the Review Commons initiative
Biology Open is pleased to be a part of the new and exciting Review Commons initiative, launched by EMBO and ASAPbio. Streamlining the publishing process, Review Commons enables high-quality peer review to take place before journal submission. Papers submitted to Review Commons will be assessed independently of any journal, focusing solely on the paper’s scientific rigor and merit.
preLights - Mammalian Y RNAs are modified at discrete guanosine residues with N-glycans
Connor Rosen discusses his selected preprint by Carolyn Bertozzi, Ryan Flynn and their co-workers on the glycosylation of small non-coding RNAs in mammalian cells.