During the production of our manuscript [1], an incorrect Figure 1 was put in place of the one we submitted, and we erred in not appropriately informing the production staff of this mistake. The corrected figure and the text describing this figure, as well as the figure legend, are present herein.
Figure 1.
Charge-Hydropathy plots. In (A) the IDP-Hydropathy scale was used, in (B) the Guy (1985) Hydropathy scale was used, and in (C) the Kyte-Doolittle (1981) hydropathy scale was used. Red circles indicate disordered proteins, blue circles indicate structured proteins. For these plots, each scale was normalized to be in the interval of 0 to 1. The Guy’s scale is multiplied by -1 prior to normalization to conform to the energy rule set by Kyte-Doolittle scale. In (A) the function describing the boundary is: <charge> = 3.31 <hydropathy> 0.97. In (B) the function describing the boundary is: <charge> = 2.32 <hydropathy> 0.93. In (C), the function describing the boundary is: <charge> = 1.35 <hydropathy> 0.49.
As stated in our manuscript [1], “The C-H plots generated using scale SVM parameters scale, Kyte-Doolittle hydropathy scale, and Guy hydropathy scale for whole protein prediction are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1A, which is derived by SVM parameters scale, shows many fewer misclassified disordered proteins on the ordered side, compared to Figure 1B and 1C.”
As further stated in reference [1]: “Figure 1. Charge-Hydropathy plots. In (A) the IDP-Hydropathy scale was used, in (B) the Guy (1985) Hydropathy scale was used, and in (C) the Kyte-Doolittle (1981) hydropathy scale was used. Red circles indicate disordered proteins, blue circles indicate structured proteins. For these plots, each scale was normalized to be in the interval of 0 to 1. The Guy’s scale is multiplied by -1 prior to normalization to conform to the energy rule set by Kyte-Doolittle scale. In (A) the function describing the boundary is: <charge> = 3.31 < hydropathy> -0.97. In (B) the function describing the boundary is: <charge> = 2.32 < hydropathy> -0.93. In (C), the function describing the boundary is <charge> = 1.35 < hydropathy> -0.49.”
For more details, the reader is referred to the published manuscript [1].
Footnotes
The online version of the original article can be found under doi:10.1186/1471-2105-15-S17-S4.
Contributor Information
Fei Huang, Email: huangfei@iu.edu.
Christopher J. Oldfield, Email: cjoldfie@umail.iu.edu
Bin Xue, Email: binxue@usf.edu.
Wei-Lun Hsu, Email: hsu20@iu.edu.
Jingwei Meng, Email: mengj@iupui.edu.
Xiaowen Liu, Email: liuxiaowencs@gmail.com.
Li Shen, Email: shenli@iu.edu.
Pedro Romero, Email: promero@wisc.edu.
Vladimir N. Uversky, Email: vuversky@health.usf.edu
A. Keith Dunker, Email: kedunker@iupui.edu.
Reference
- 1.Huang F, Oldfield CJ, Xue B, Hsu WL, Meng J, Liu X, Shen L, Romero P, Uversky VN, Dunker AK. IDP hydropathy: A new hydropathy scale that improves disorder prediction. BMC Bioinformatics. 2014;15(Suppl 17):54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-15-S17-S4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]