Error in Figure
In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Figure 5 as published. The images shown for the control group in 24 h are incorrect; the images for the control group in 48 h were inadvertently inserted because the two images are similar. The corrected Figure 5 appears below. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
Figure 5.
Effect of riligustilide on the cell cycle in HCT-8 cells. Cells were treated with riligustilide (5 μM) for 24 and 48 h. Then the cells were fixed and stained with PI to analyze DNA content by flow cytometry. (A) Representative histograms of one cell cycle analysis; (B) DNA content of the gated cells ± S.D. of three independent experiments. Student’s t-test was used for two group comparison. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 vs. the control. “+” represents that 10 μM RLG was added, “−” represents control.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Reference
- 1.Gong W., Zhou Y., Li X., Gao X., Tian J., Qin X., Du G. Neuroprotective and Cytotoxic Phthalides from Angelicae Sinensis Radix. Molecules. 2016;21:549. doi: 10.3390/molecules21050549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]