VOLUME 292 (2017) PAGES 5760–5769
There were errors in the concentration of VWF D4-CK, 20-fold, and of ADAMTS13 CUB1-2 fragment, 30-fold. Fig. 5 has been corrected. In addition, the following areas in the text should be corrected.
Figure 5.
TSP8 was not required to maintain the closed ADAMTS13 conformation but was essential for conformational activation by VWF D4-CK. The FRETS-VWF73 assay was used to determine the relative proteolytic activities of the C-terminal-truncated ADAMTS13 variants WTΔCUB2 (A and B), WTΔCUB1-2(C and D), WTΔTSP8 (E and F), and WTΔTSP8-CUB2 (G and H). The ability of VWF D4-CK (added at 20, 40, or 60 nm) to enhance the activities of these variants was also examined. In each panel, the activities of WT and GoF ADAMTS13 are included for reference. Normalized raw data (A, C, E, and G) is representative of three independent experiments and relative proteolytic activities (B, D, F, and H) are presented as the mean ± S.D. (n = 3); *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.005.
On page 5761, 2nd column, line 6, “even when added up to a concentration of 10 nm” should read “even when added up to a concentration of 300 nm.” On page 5768, 1st column, last paragraph, “in the absence/presence of 40 nm CUB1, CUB2, or CUB1-2 fragment” should read “in the absence/presence of 1.2 μm CUB1, CUB2, or CUB1-2 fragment.” Page 5768, 2nd column, 2nd paragraph, “purified CUB1, CUB2, or CUB1-2 domain fragments (6 nm) or VWF D4-CK (2–6 nm)” should read “purified CUB1, CUB2, or CUB1-2 domain fragments (180 nm) or VWF D4-CK (40–120 nm).” Page 5768, 2nd column, the penultimate sentence, “in the absence/presence of 6 nm VWF D4-CK” should read “in the absence/presence of 120 nm VWF D4-CK.” These errors do not affect the results or conclusions of this work.