The authors of “Quantitative imaging of chromatin decompaction in living cells” (Mol. Biol. Cell [2018] 29, 1763–1777; originally published in MBoC In Press as 10.1091/mbc.E17-11-0648) wish to make a correction to their article. In the original HTML and PDF versions, Arp6 was inadvertently described as a component of the INO80 complex instead of the SWR1 complex. This has been corrected in the text and in the labeling on the updated Figure 4, shown below.
FIGURE 4:
Decompaction correlates with transcriptional activation. (A) Distance between LacO and TetO repeats in cell populations 1 h after addition of the indicated carbon source to the raffinose-containing culture medium to a final concentration of 2% (raffinose 4%). Each dot represents the median of an independent experiment with at least 100 analyzed cells (typically 600–1000). Lines and error bars indicate means and standard deviations. *** adjusted p value < 0.001, ** < 0.01, n.s. not significant (p > 0.05). Colored p values indicate significance relative to the wild type (wt) under the same condition. (B) Fold induction of GAL10 mRNA compared with growth in raffinose determined by qPCR (normalized for ACT1 mRNA as endogenous control). Means of three biological replicates are shown. Error bars represent SE. (C) Kinetics of chromatin opening and closing in wild-type and mutant cells. Cells were grown overnight in medium with 2% raffinose or 2% galactose. Galactose or glucose respectively was added or not added to 2% final concentration at time point 0. Shown are the means of three or more biological replicates with the standard error represented by the shaded areas. (D) smFISH for GAL1, GAL7, and GAL10 in the indicated strains growing at steady state in galactose. Insets show enhanced contrast for indicated cells. Images are maximum-intensity projections of z stacks encompassing the entire cells. (E) Box plot showing the intensities of transcriptions spots in the different strains (distribution from one representative experiment out of two biological replicates).
Furthermore, new figure panels have been added to Supplemental Figure 4; see below. They show the behavior of a strain in which ARP8, a member of the INO80 complex, was deleted. The data demonstrate that the error does not affect the conclusions drawn in the paper. The text has been updated to correct the original mistake and to refer to the new supplemental figure panels as follows: “In contrast to the SWI/SNF complex, the chromatin-remodeling complexes SWR1 (represented by swr1Δ and arp6Δ) and INO80 (represented by arp8Δ) were required neither for chromatin decompaction nor for transcriptional activation at the GAL locus (Figure 4, A and B, and Supplemental Figure 4, E and F).” Supplemental Tables 2 and 3 have been updated to include the additional reagents used for the new Supplemental Figure panels. The authors thank Andrew Seeber for alerting them to the mistake.
SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE 4:
(A)-(D) Gene expression data for the mutants analyzed in the manuscript normalized by the level of GAL10 mRNA present in the corresponding wild type strain in the same condition. Data are the same as plotted in the manuscript with different normalization. Each bar represents the mean of 3-4 biological replicates, the error bars represent the standard error. Differences between wild type and mutants were tested in a mixed linear model with multiple comparison post-hoc tests (compare Material and Methods). Adjusted p-values: *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.05, n.s. p > 0.05. (E)-(F) INO80 is not required for nucleosome eviction upon GAL gene activation. (E) Distance between LacO and TetO repeats in cell populations one hour after addition of the indicated carbon source to the raffinose containing culture medium to a final concentration of 2% (raffinose 4%). Each dot represents the median of an independent experiment with at least 100 analyzed cells (typically 600-1000). Lines and error bars indicate means and standard deviations. *** adjusted p-value < 0.001, n.s. not significant (p > 0.05). Colored p-values indicate significance relative to the wild type (wt) in the same condition. (F) Fold induction of GAL10 mRNA compared to growth in raffinose (left) or compared to the wildtype strain in the same condition (right) determined by quantitative PCR (normalized for ACT1 mRNA as endogenous control). Means of three biological replicates are shown. Error bars represent SE. No statistically significant difference in induction was observed compared to wildtype cells (adjusted p values > 0.05).
The HTML and PDF versions were corrected on the Molecular Biology of the Cell website on February 15, 2019. These corrections may not appear on copies of the article that reside on other websites.