Abstract

Upon close examination of the representative image depicted in 'figure 2' from [1] and a figure published elsewhere [2], we realized that the 'figure 2' of this work was a lower magnification of a section of the same microscope slide used in the previous manuscript [2]. The experiments leading to the data for these two manuscripts were generated during the same time period, in the same laboratory and were compiled, annotated and stored in the same folder, since pictures are taken in bulk at our microscopy facility on a fee for service basis. The figures both describe tissue culture of Chlamydia from clinical samples on the same tissue culture substrate (J774A.1 cells) and were in a single data base of figures with different alpha numeric designations. We believe that sometime during the compilation and annotation process, the representative 'figure 2' previously shown in this work was incorrectly labeled. After careful scrutiny, we have determined that the image was in fact taken from a culture coverslip that was infected with lysates from pediatric bronchial lavage samples and not normal blood donor buffy coat (BC) samples. The original published figure was a 600× immunofluorescence image [2], part of which can be seen in the lower magnification image (400×) in this work. The authors deeply regret this error in image annotation and later image selection and therefore submit a representative image from this work to replace the earlier incorrect image depicted in 'figure 2', which is provided with this manuscript (see figure ​figure11). Figure 1 This image is provided as a replacement for the original figure 2; Chlamydiae within Peripheral Blood Transfer Infection when Cultured in vitro on J774A.1 host cell monolayers. BC from NBD peripheral blood samples were isolated, lysed and layered onto ...

Highlights

  • Frances Cirino1, Wilmore C Webley1, Corrie West1, Nancy L Croteau1, Chester Andrzejewski Jr2 and Elizabeth S Stuart*1

  • Upon close examination of the representative image depicted in 'figure 2' from [1] and a figure published elsewhere [2], we realized that the 'figure 2' of this work was a lower magnification of a section of the same microscope slide used in the previous manuscript [2]

  • The experiments leading to the data for these two manuscripts were generated during the same time period, in the same laboratory and were compiled, annotated and stored in the same folder, since pictures are taken in bulk at our microscopy facility on a fee for service basis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Frances Cirino1, Wilmore C Webley1, Corrie West1, Nancy L Croteau1, Chester Andrzejewski Jr2 and Elizabeth S Stuart*1. Published: 16 November 2006 BMC Infectious Diseases 2006, 6:165 doi:10.1186/1471-2334-6-165 Upon close examination of the representative image depicted in 'figure 2' from [1] and a figure published elsewhere [2], we realized that the 'figure 2' of this work was a lower magnification of a section of the same microscope slide used in the previous manuscript [2].

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call