In our recently
published article on the structures and base pair opening
dynamics of Dickerson–Drew dodecamer (DDD) duplexes with incorporated
5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC), 5-formylcytosine (5fC), or 5-carboxylcytosine
(5caC), we inadvertently failed to reference two publications by others
who had reported structures of the DDD with single 5hmC residues inserted
per strand. Spingler and co-workers[1] reported
the structures of DDDs with
5hmC replacing either C3 (5′-dCG-5hmC-GAATTCGCG-3′;
two crystal forms) or C9 (5′-dCGCGAATT-5hmC-GCG-3′)
at resolutions of between 1.66 and 1.99 Å. Schofield and co-workers[2] subsequently published a structure of
the DDD with 5hmC replacing C9 at greater resolution (1.3
Å)
and assessed the water structure around and conformational variations
of the 5hmC hydroxyl moiety. Our structure of the modified DDD 5′-dCGCGAATT-5hmC-GCG-3′
had a resolution of 1.02 Å. Similar to the structures published
before, the presence of 5hmC
had negligible effects on the global and local geometry of the DDD
using the native duplex as a reference. We apologize for the omission.
There is also a typographical error in the right-hand column on p
1297. The sentence in question should read “At the neighbor
C3:G10 base pair, the G10 N1H resonance
remained detectable at 55 °C, also exhibiting broadening.”