Skip to content

Biomaterials Science

Frontiers in Biomaterials Science ·

Volume 3 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fbiom.2024.1458672

Corrigendum: Macrophage variance: investigating how macrophage origin influences responses to soluble and physical cues with immortalized vs. primary cells in 2D and 3D culture

  • Jodi Graf1
  • Kartik Bomb1
  • Michael Trautmann-Rodriguez1
  • Bader M. Jarai1
  • Nicole Gill1
  • April M. Kloxin1,2*corresponding author
  • Catherine A. Fromen1*corresponding author
  1. 11 Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, United States
  2. 22 Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, United States
Article metrics0 viewsView details

Abstract

Keywords

In the published article, there was an error in Figure 9G as published. The labels on the images “BMM” and “Raw264.7” were inadvertently switched. The corrected figure and its caption appear below.

Effect of soluble stimuli on macrophage polarization in well-defined, bioprinted 3D cultures. Effect of polarization stimuli on macrophage polarization was determined for RAW 264.7 cells and primary BMMs (C57BL/6) in 3D culture (1.1 kPa PEG-peptide hydrogels with RGD, GFOGER, YIGSR, and HA). **(A)** CD86 and **(B)** MHCII were used as M1 markers. **(C)** CD206 and **(D)** EGR2 were used as M2 markers. All data are normalized to the UT control for the respective cell type. **(E)** Cell area and **(F)** circularity were quantified for all the cell types across different conditions. **(G)** Representative images of BMMs with nuclei (blue) and F-actin (red) qualitatively show morphology of BMMs across all the treatment groups. Statistics were performed using Tukey’s *post hoc* test with one-way ANOVA. **p* < 0.05, ***p* < 0.01, ****p* < 0.001, *****p* < 0.0001.” Scale bar: 100 µm.
Figure 1. Effect of soluble stimuli on macrophage polarization in well-defined, bioprinted 3D cultures. Effect of polarization stimuli on macrophage polarization was determined for RAW 264.7 cells and primary BMMs (C57BL/6) in 3D culture (1.1 kPa PEG-peptide hydrogels with RGD, GFOGER, YIGSR, and HA). (A) CD86 and (B) MHCII were used as M1 markers. (C) CD206 and (D) EGR2 were used as M2 markers. All data are normalized to the UT control for the respective cell type. (E) Cell area and (F) circularity were quantified for all the cell types across different conditions. (G) Representative images of BMMs with nuclei (blue) and F-actin (red) qualitatively show morphology of BMMs across all the treatment groups. Statistics were performed using Tukey’s post hoc test with one-way ANOVA. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.” Scale bar: 100 µm.

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Citation

Graf, J., et al. (2024). Corrigendum: Macrophage variance: investigating how macrophage origin influences responses to soluble and physical cues with immortalized vs. primary cells in 2D and 3D culture. Frontiers in Biomaterials Science, Volume 3. https://doi.org/
Received
Accepted
Published
Volume
3 - 2024

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Graf, Bomb, Trautmann-Rodriguez, Jarai, Gill, Kloxin and Fromen.

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

*Correspondence: April M. Kloxin; Catherine A. Fromen

Article metrics

Views
0
Downloads
0
Citations
0
Shares
0