Peng Zhang1,2,3, Chun-Lin Yang1,2,3, Tong Du1,2,3, Yu-Dong Liu1,2,3, Meng-Ru Ge1,4, Heng Li1,2,3, Ru-Tao Liu1,2,3, Cong-Cong Wang1,2,3, Ying-Chun Dou5, Rui-Sheng Duan6,7,8. 1. Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, No. 16766, Jingshi Road, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. 2. Shandong Institute of Neuroimmunology, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. 3. Shandong Key Laboratory for Rheumatic Disease and Translational Medicine, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. 4. School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, People's Republic of China. 5. College of Basic Medical Sciences, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, 250355, People's Republic of China. 6. Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, No. 16766, Jingshi Road, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. ruisheng_duan@yahoo.com. 7. Shandong Institute of Neuroimmunology, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. ruisheng_duan@yahoo.com. 8. Shandong Key Laboratory for Rheumatic Disease and Translational Medicine, Jinan, 250014, People's Republic of China. ruisheng_duan@yahoo.com.
Correction to: J Neuroinflammation (2021) 18:244 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-021-02298-6
Following publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed that there was an error in the order of Figs. 3 and 4: the two figures were inadvertently transposed with one another. The original article has been updated and the correct version can be found in this erratum. (Figs. 3 and 4).
Fig. 3
Effects of diabetes on the T helper cell differentiation in EAMG rats. The percentages of Th1 (A), Th2 (B), Th17 (C), and Treg cells (D) among spleen MNCs were analyzed by flow cytometry. Data were from two independent experiments and expressed as mean ± SEM. n = 8 in the DM + EAMG group and n = 7 in the EAMG group. The significance of differences was assessed by the Unpaired Student’s t-test. ns means not significant, *p < 0.05
Fig. 4
Effects of diabetes on Tfh cells and the subtypes. The percentages of Tfh cells in the lymph nodes were assessed (A). The percentages of total Tfh cells (B), Tfh1 (C), Tfh2 (D), and Tfh17 (E) among spleen MNCs were analyzed by flow cytometry. Data were from two independent experiments and expressed as mean ± SEM. n = 8 in the DM + EAMG group and n = 7 in the EAMG group. The significance of differences was assessed by the Unpaired Student’s t-test. ns means not significant, *p < 0.05
Effects of diabetes on the T helper cell differentiation in EAMG rats. The percentages of Th1 (A), Th2 (B), Th17 (C), and Treg cells (D) among spleen MNCs were analyzed by flow cytometry. Data were from two independent experiments and expressed as mean ± SEM. n = 8 in the DM + EAMG group and n = 7 in the EAMG group. The significance of differences was assessed by the Unpaired Student’s t-test. ns means not significant, *p < 0.05Effects of diabetes on Tfh cells and the subtypes. The percentages of Tfh cells in the lymph nodes were assessed (A). The percentages of total Tfh cells (B), Tfh1 (C), Tfh2 (D), and Tfh17 (E) among spleen MNCs were analyzed by flow cytometry. Data were from two independent experiments and expressed as mean ± SEM. n = 8 in the DM + EAMG group and n = 7 in the EAMG group. The significance of differences was assessed by the Unpaired Student’s t-test. ns means not significant, *p < 0.05