Erratum: Combined effects of 60 Hz electromagnetic field exposure with various stress factors on cellular transformation in NIH3T3 cells

Authors

Errata

This article corrects:

  1. Combined effects of 60 Hz electromagnetic field exposure with various stress factors on cellular transformation in NIH3T3 cells Volume 33, Issue 3, 207–214, Article first published online: 6 September 2011

In the original article [Lee et al., 2012], the published Figure 3b is an image of Soft agar assay, but the same picture was uploaded to represent both IR and IR-ELF exposures. We have attached a corrected version of Figure 3. The scientific conclusions of the article were not affected by this error in anyway. The authors regret the mistake.

Figure 1.

Schematic of the 60 Hz ELF magnetic field exposure system for in vitro studies. a: System structure of the magnetic field generator. b: Sixty hertz magnetic field exposure system included a power supply, magnetic field generating coils and a ferrite shielding system in a CO2 incubator. c: ELF magnetic field distribution for the middle floor of the exposure system. d: Maintenance of temperature in the exposure location during the exposure period.

Figure 2.

a: Anchorage-independent growth of NIH3T3 cells in soft agar after 4 h treatment of indicated concentrations of H2O2. b: Exposure to ionizing radiation (IR) with a single or fractionated dose. *Significantly different from untreated control cells at P < 0.05 (mean ± SD).

Figure 3.

a,b: Number of colonies with 4 h exposure of 1 mT ELF with or without two doses of 1 Gy IR. c,d: Treatment with 100 µM H2O2. b,d: Typical morphology of colonies after IR exposure or H2O2 treatment is also shown (white arrows). Scale bar = 50 µm. *Significantly different from untreated control cells at P < 0.05 (mean ± SD). CON, unexposed control cells; ELF, ELF-exposed cells; IR, ionizing radiation-exposed cells; H2O2, H2O2-exposed cells; ELF + IR, combined exposure of ELF and IR; ELF + H2O2, combined exposure of ELF and H2O2.

Figure 4.

a: Imunoblotting of c-Myc protein after transfection of empty vector (V5) or c-Myc was performed in NIH3T3 cells. b: Cellular transformation assay in control and V5 or c-Myc transfected NIH3T3 cells. c: Morphologyand d: number of colonies with exposure to 4 h ELF (1 mT), 2 Gy IR, or ELF + IR in c-Myc transfected and V5 transfected cells. Scale bar = 50 µm. *Significantly different from corresponding untreated control cells at P < 0.05 (mean ± SD). CON, unexposed control cells; V5, pcDNA-V5 control plasmid transfected cells; c-Myc, c-Myc-V5 plasmid transfected cells; ELF, ELF-exposed cells; IR, ionizing radiation-exposed cells; ELF + IR, combined exposure of ELF and IR.

Ancillary