Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Publisher's Note: Abstract miswording

Posted by jtgoncalves on 27 May 2010 at 23:31 GMT

sufficient
http://plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010873#article1.front1.article-meta1.abstract1.sec3.p1

The Conclusions/Significance should read:

"We demonstrated that the BD-N and BD-C2 binding domains are necessary for CaM binding to the native channel, and, therefore, that BD-C1 is unable to bind CaM independently."

No competing interests declared.