Correction to: Nature Communications 10.1038/s41467-021-21355-5, published online 18 February 2021.
The original version of this Article contained an error in the Methods, section ‘Spore preparation’, which incorrectly read ‘6.3% weight vol−1 (BD, USA), 0.35% weight vol−1 protease peptone’. The correct version replaces this text with ‘6.3% weight vol−1 bacto peptone (BD, USA), 0.35% weight vol−1 proteose peptone’.
In the Methods, the incorrect supplier and catalogue number for an antibody was listed. The sentence ‘phalloidin Alexa-Fluor 568 (#ab176753 Abcam, USA)’ should read ‘phalloidin Alexa-Fluor 568 (#A12380 Thermo Fisher, USA)’.
The Methods, in the section ‘Colonic and ileal loop assay ’, originally incorrectly read ‘To evaluate the effect of nystatin or RGD peptide in C. difficile spore internalization, mice were treated with 17,000 UI kg−1 nystatin (n = 4) 24 h before the surgery. In the loop, as control, mice were treated with 0.9% NaCl (saline; n = 4) then, ligated loops were injected with 3 × 10 C. difficile R20291. In the case of RGD, ligated loops were injected with 250 nmol of RGD peptide (n = 4)’. The correct version replaces this text with ‘To evaluate the effect of nystatin and RGD peptide in C. difficile spore internalization in vivo, 24 h prior to surgery, mice (n = 4) were treated with nystatin (17,000 IU kg−1) in 100 µL of DPBS by oral gavage; control mice (n = 8; 4 for control and 4 for RGD treatment) where treated with 100 µL of DPBS by oral gavage. On the day of surgery, ileal and colonic ligated loops of control mice (n = 4) were injected with 100 µL of DPBS containing 3 × 108 C. difficile R20291 spores; ileal and colonic ligated loops of nystatin-treated mice (n = 4) were injected with 100 µL of DPBS containing 3 × 108 C. difficile R20291 spores and 340 IU (17,000 IU kg−1) nystatin; ileal and colonic ligated loops of RGD-treated mice (n = 4) were injected with 100 µL of DPBS containing 3 × 108 C. difficile R20291 spores and 86.6 µg (250 nM) of RGD peptide. DPBS was used to resuspend nystatin and RGD peptides because it rendered higher solubility than saline solution (0.9% weight vol−1 NaCl)’.
The Methods, in the section ‘Quantification of C. difficile spores from feces and colon of mice’, originally incorrectly read ‘1.5% weight vol−1 (BD, USA; TCCFA plates)’. The correct version replaces this text with ‘1.5% weight vol−1 agar (BD, USA) (TCCFA plates)’.
The original version of this Article incorrectly cited ‘Bakken, T. L. & Sageng, H. Mental health nursing of adults with intellectual disabilities and mental illness: a review of empirical studies 1994–2013. Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. 30, 286–291 (2016)’ as Ref. 4. The correct version replaces this reference with ‘Evans, C. T. & Safdar, N. Current trends in the epidemiology and outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin. Infect. Dis. 60 (Suppl 2), S66-71 (2015)’.
These errors have been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.