Erratum

Erratum for the Report “Small RNA duplexes function as mobile silencing signals between plant cells” by P. Dunoyer, G. Schott, C. Himber, D. Meyer, A. Takeda, J. C. Carrington, O. Voinnet

Science  22 Jan 2016:
Vol. 351, Issue 6271,
DOI: 10.1126/science.aae0387

In the Report “Small RNA duplexes function as mobile silencing signals between plant cells,” the following mistakes in Figs. 1E and 3A were made during the final stages of figure mounting. The original lab book data provided to the editors of Science showed that these errors did not alter the results and their conclusions. Patrice Dunoyer, who assembled the figures, takes full responsibility for these mistakes. The figures have been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the Report online.

Figure 1E depicts @HA immunoprecipitation experiments performed on SUC:P19HA transgenic lines in the SUC:SUL RNAi reporter system. The published low–molecular-weight Northern blot depicted in this figure panel was inappropriately mounted with the wrong rRNA loading control, which was mistakenly reused from a previous publication [P. Dunoyer et al., Nat. Genet. 39, 848 (2007)]. In addition, a divider should have been added to clearly indicate splicing of the original blot between the depicted “Total RNA” and “IP@HA” samples. The authors have retrieved all of the original data intended to mount Fig. 1E and have produced a corrected figure panel. The correction has no bearing on the original conclusions that the extent of SUL-silencing suppression correlates with the extent to which the 21-nt SUL siRNAs are sequestered by P19.

Figure 3A depicts @AGO1 immunoprecipitation experiments performed on SUC:P19HA or SUC:P19 transgenic lines in the SUC:SUL reporter system. The published low–molecular-weight Northern blot depicted in this figure panel (left side; SS, Suc-P19#10 samples) was inappropriately mounted with the wrong rRNA loading control. In addition, a divider should have been added to clearly indicate splicing of the original blots between the depicted “Total RNA” and “IP@AGO1” samples. The authors have retrieved all of the original data intended to mount Fig. 3A and have produced a corrected figure panel. The correction has no bearing on the original conclusions that approximately half of the 21-nt SUL siRNA pool is sequestered away from AGO1 by phloem-specific P19 and that this sequestration is sufficient to prevent SUL-silencing movement.

Two figure panels in the Supplementary Materials were also incorrect. A revised SOM has been posted with the corrected figures, described here.

In fig. S2B, the published low–molecular-weight Northern blots were inappropriately mounted with the wrong rRNA loading controls. In addition, for the “@SUL” and “@159” low–molecular-weight Northern blots depicted on the right side, a divider should have been added to clearly indicate splicing of the original blots between the “SS” and “SS/SUC-P21HA#3” samples. We have retrieved all of the original data intended for fig. S2B and have produced a corrected figure panel. The correction does not alter our results, as the original rRNA data provide equally good support for equal loading.

In fig. S2C, the published low–molecular-weight Northern blot contains a duplicated section of the original blot, made in order to create an artificial spacer between the “Total RNA” and “IP@HA” samples. We have retrieved the original data intended for fig. S2C and have produced a corrected figure panel. The correction has no bearing on our original conclusions that, as seen with P19, phloem-specific expression of P21 prevents SUL-silencing movement through sequestration of the 21-nt SUL siRNA pool.

Navigate This Article