Correction to: Severe but not moderate hyperoxia of newborn mice causes an emphysematous lung phenotype in adulthood without persisting oxidative stress and inflammation.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors flagged that the article had published with an error in 'Table 1'.

Correction to: BMC Pulm Med

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-019-0993-5

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors flagged that the article had published with an error in ‘Table 1’.

Table 1

General parameters of PND60 mice treated with neonatal hyperoxia

Parameter		N		mH		sH
		Normoxia		moderate Hyperoxia		severe Hyperoxia
PND60-survival a	(%)	80		68*		72
Physical status
body weight b	(g)	19.3	± 2.80	19.4	± 2.40	19.2	± 2.90
wheel-running activity c	(km·d− 1)	7.32	± 1.71	7.68	± 2.23	7.62	± 2.38
Blood values
erythrocytes b	(n∙103∙mm−3)	6.93	± 1.05	8.03	± 0.57	7.22	± 0.91
platelets b	(n∙105∙mm−3)	1.59	± 0.88	4.41	± 3.83*	2.31	± 2.11
leukocytes b	(n∙103∙mm−3)	9.78	± 2.53	9.65	± 3.79	9.68	± 2.78
Lung values
lung-to-body weight b	(·10−3)	1.29	± 0.28	1.28	± 0.26	1.37	± 0.28
lung wet-to-dry weight b		8.32	± 1.43	7.84	± 1.66	8.80	± 1.38
BAL cells b, d	(n·103)	52.6	± 32.9	101	± 59.1*	58.2	± 40.7
BAL protein b	(μg∙ml−1)	88.9	± 35.4	80.5	± 36.6	96.2	± 38.7
BAL IgM b	(ng∙ml−1)	15.1	± 13.1	16.0	± 9.50	18.9	± 14.7
BAL sRAGE b	(μg∙ml−1)	5.46	± 1.49	5.39	± 1.65	5.94	± 2.62

Data are means ± SD with *P < 0.05 vs. N group

an = 80 in N group, n = 50 in mH group, n = 40 in sH group

bn ≥ 28 each group

cn = 17 each group. The respiratory function is more challenged by faster than slower running speeds. As female mice run faster and reach higher running distances than male mice [20], we only studied females

dCytological investigations showed alveolar monocyte-like cells as major cell type (80%) followed by differentiated macrophages (19%), granulocytes (0.8%) and lung epithelial cells (0.2%). The relative quantity of these cell types was not altered in the mH or sH group

The error was that in the row PND60-survival the value ‘80’ was erroneously repeated, and the special symbol (*) contained in the value ‘68*’ was erroneously repeated after the value.

Table 1 has now been corrected in the published article.

Please find the corrected Table 1 below for reference.