Andrea Dalmao-Fernandez1*
Aleksandra Aizenshtadt2
Hege G. Bakke1
Stefan Krauss2Arild C. Rustan1
G. Hege Thoresen1,3
Eili Tranheim Kase1- 1Section for Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Biosciences, Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- 2Hybrid Technology Hub Centre of Excellence, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- 3Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
A Correction on
Development of three-dimensional primary human myospheres as culture model of skeletal muscle cells for metabolic studies
by Dalmao-Fernandez A, Aizenshtadt A, Bakke HG, Krauss S, Rustan AC, Thoresen GH and Kase ET (2023). Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 11:1130693. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1130693
There was a mistake in Figure 1 as published. One of the gene names is misspelled: “solute carrier family 26 member 4 (SLC26A4)”, the correct form is: “solute carrier family 2 member 4 (SLC2A4).” The corrected Figure 1 appears below.
Figure 1. Evaluation of 3D morphological parameters and comparison of muscle cell differentiation markers in 2D and 3D models. Myospheres were formed in the ultra-low attachment treatment (ULA) 96-well plate system and differentiation was carried out between 0 and 21 days. After 10 days of differentiation, mRNA was isolated, and gene expression was analyzed by qPCR. (A) Phase-contrast photos of myospheres during 3, 5, 10 and 12 of differentiation. Diameter (B) was analyzed by AnaSP for up to 21 days of differentiation. (C) mRNA expression of the muscle differentiation markers MYOD, MYOG, MYH2, MYH7, and SLC2A4 before (day 0) and after differentiation (day 10), normalized to housekeeping gene (RPLP0). Scale bar = 200 μm. Results are presented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 **p > 0.01 ***p < 0.0001 by ordinary one-way ANOVA test.
There was a mistake in the caption of Figure 1 as published. One of the gene names is misspelled: “solute carrier family 26 member 4 (SLC26A4”), the correct form is: “solute carrier family 2 member 4 (SLC2A4)”. Also the panels aren’t correct: panel D should not be there. The corrected caption of Figure 1 appears below.
In the first section of the Results (3.1 Optical characteristics and differentiation markers in 3D muscle cell model), one of the gene names is misspelled: “solute carrier family 26 member 4 (SLC26A4)”, the correct form is: “solute carrier family 2 member 4 (SLC2A4)”.
A correction has been made to the section Results, subsection 3.1 Optical characteristics and differentiation markers in 3D muscle cell model, Paragraph 2:
“The process of muscle differentiation is regulated through different phases which stimulate myoblasts into fusion and maturation to become myotubes (Schmidt et al., 2019; Isesele and Mazurak, 2021). The differentiation process is initiated by an increased expression of myogenic differentiation 1 (MYOD) which induces gene expression of myogenin (MYOG) and subsequent expression of differentiation markers such as the myosin-heavy chains 2 (MYH2) and 7 (MYH7), and maturation factors related to metabolic muscle function like the insulin-regulated facilitative glucose transporter, solute carrier family 2 member 4 (SLC2A4). Comparison of expression of MYOD, MYH2, MYH7, and SLC2A4 revealed higher mRNA expression levels in 3D than 2D myotube models (Figure 1C). This relevant finding demonstrated a higher efficiency of cell maturation during differentiation in 3D than in 2D myotube models. In both cell models, mRNA expression levels of MYOD, MYOG, MYH2, MYH7, and SLC2A4 tended to increase after 10 days of differentiation (Figure 1C)”.
The original article has been updated.
Generative AI statement
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Keywords: skeletal muscle, myosphere, energy metabolism, metabolic disorders, 3D cell model, muscle spheroid
Citation: Dalmao-Fernandez A, Aizenshtadt A, Bakke HG, Krauss S, Rustan AC, Thoresen GH and Kase ET (2025) Correction: Development of three-dimensional primary human myospheres as culture model of skeletal muscle cells for metabolic studies. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 13:1687822. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1687822
Received: 18 August 2025; Accepted: 01 September 2025;
Published: 16 September 2025.
Edited and reviewed by:
Ranieri Cancedda, Independent Researcher, Genova, ItalyCopyright © 2025 Dalmao-Fernandez, Aizenshtadt, Bakke, Krauss, Rustan, Thoresen and Kase. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Andrea Dalmao-Fernandez, YS5kLmZlcm5hbmRlekBmYXJtYXNpLnVpby5ubw==