ERRATUM Erratum: Noise benefit in prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle reflex Erik Pålsson & Göran Söderlund & Daniel Klamer & Filip Bergquist Published online: 22 December 2010 # Springer-Verlag 2010 Erratum to: Psychopharmacology DOI 10.1007/s00213-010-2074-6 The author wishes to apologize for inadvertently providing the wrong image for Fig. 4. Here is the correct image: Fig. 4 a ASR to a single pulse expressed as digital units (mean±SEM) at different acoustic background noises in 6-OHDA-lesioned Sprague– Dawley rats. Responses are compared with intact Sprague–Dawley rats. Two-way ANOVA did not indicate a significant effect of 6-OHDA lesioning F(1, 100)=2.157, p=0.1575, but significant effect of noise F(5, 100)=27.3 and interaction lesion×noise F(5, 100)=2.546, p=0.0326. Significant differences in Bonferroni-corrected post hoc t tests indicated by a single asterisk p<0.05. b PPI of the startle response expressed as percent (mean±SEM) of startle response. Two-way ANOVA indicated a main effect of background noise level, F(5, 100)=75.34, p<0.0001, but not of lesion treatment F(1, 100)=0.7398, p=0.3999 or interaction lesion×noise F(5, 100)=2.035, p=0.0801 The online version of the original article can be found at http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/s00213-010-2074-6. E. Pålsson : D. Klamer Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 400, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden G. Söderlund Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden F. Bergquist (*) Clinical Neuroscience and Rehabiliation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 400, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] Psychopharmacology (2011) 214:977 DOI 10.1007/s00213-010-2135-x

Erratum: Noise benefit in prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle reflex

Download PDF Report

Upload
erik-palsson
View
216
Download
4

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

ERRATUM

Erratum: Noise benefit in prepulse inhibition of the acousticstartle reflex

Erik Pålsson & Göran Söderlund & Daniel Klamer &

Filip Bergquist

Published online: 22 December 2010# Springer-Verlag 2010

Erratum to: PsychopharmacologyDOI 10.1007/s00213-010-2074-6

The author wishes to apologize for inadvertently providingthe wrong image for Fig. 4. Here is the correct image:

Fig. 4 a ASR to a single pulse expressed as digital units (mean±SEM) atdifferent acoustic background noises in 6-OHDA-lesioned Sprague–Dawley rats. Responses are compared with intact Sprague–Dawley rats.Two-way ANOVA did not indicate a significant effect of 6-OHDAlesioning F(1, 100)=2.157, p=0.1575, but significant effect of noiseF(5, 100)=27.3 and interaction lesion×noise F(5, 100)=2.546,p=0.0326. Significant differences in Bonferroni-corrected post hoc ttests indicated by a single asterisk p<0.05. b PPI of the startle responseexpressed as percent (mean±SEM) of startle response. Two-wayANOVAindicated a main effect of background noise level, F(5, 100)=75.34,p<0.0001, but not of lesion treatment F(1, 100)=0.7398, p=0.3999 orinteraction lesion×noise F(5, 100)=2.035, p=0.0801

The online version of the original article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-010-2074-6.

E. Pålsson :D. KlamerDepartment of Pharmacology,Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy,University of Gothenburg,Box 400, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden

G. SöderlundDepartment of Linguistics, Stockholm University,106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

F. Bergquist (*)Clinical Neuroscience and Rehabiliation,Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology,The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg,Box 400, 405 30 Gothenburg, Swedene-mail: [email protected]

Psychopharmacology (2011) 214:977DOI 10.1007/s00213-010-2135-x

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-010-2074-6