Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46668-w, published online 15 July 2019
The original version of this article contained a typographical error in the abstract.
“Principal component analysis revealed that the Venus flytrap domain (VFD) of T1R2 monomer was adapted by the induced-fit mechanism to accommodate the focused polyols, in which α-helical residues 233–268 moved significantly closer to stabilize ligands.”
now reads:
“Principal component analysis revealed that the Venus flytrap domain (VFD) of T1R2 monomer was adapted by the induced-fit mechanism to accommodate the focused polyols, in which residues 233–268 moved significantly closer to stabilize ligands.”
Additionally, the original version of this article contained a typographical error in the Results section under the subheading ‘Essential dynamics of the T1R2-T1R3 STR upon polyols complexation’.
“Moreover, binding of these polyols stimulated the direction of motion of α-helical residues 233–268 (purple dashed circle), located near to the binding pocket, to become significantly closer to xylitol and sorbitol, resulting in a compact molecular shape.”
now reads:
“Moreover, binding of these polyols stimulated the direction of motion of residues 233–268 (purple dashed circle), located near to the binding pocket, to become significantly closer to xylitol and sorbitol, resulting in a compact molecular shape.”
The original version of this article also contained a typographical error in the second paragraph of the discussion section.
“Furthermore, binding of the two polyols converted the direction of motion of not only amino acids within a spherical radius of 5 Å but also residues 233–268, which is an α-helix element located near to the binding pocket, to become significantly closer to the ligands.”
now reads:
“Furthermore, binding of the two polyols converted the direction of motion of not only amino acids within a spherical radius of 5 Å but also residues 233–268, which are near to the binding pocket, to become significantly closer to the ligands.”
Furthermore, in Figure 5B the key was incorrect.
“Model 2_MM/PBSA”
now reads
“Model 2_MM/GBSA”.
These errors have now been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.
Lastly, in Figure 6A, the labelling for the residue N143 was missing. This has now been corrected in the PDF of the article. The HTML was correct at the time of publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Mahalapbutr, P., Darai, N., Panman, W. et al. Publisher Correction: Atomistic mechanisms underlying the activation of the G protein-coupled sweet receptor heterodimer by sugar alcohol recognition. Sci Rep 9, 18996 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55307-3
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55307-3
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
