In this erratum, we are submitting the corrected Figure 5, as provided below. The corrected version has been approved by coauthors. Figure 5. Ionic strength dependence of the energy transfer efficiency of RD (circle), RE (diamond), and KE (pentagon) using the three different models for FRET analysis from 0 to 300 mM ionic strength. The energy transfer efficiency for these sensors was calculated using the ensemble averaging approach (A) and the weighted (B) and unweighted (C) energy transfer rate determined approach. All measurements were acquired in buffer supplemented with KCl. The error bars represent the standard deviation between two experiments. This article has not yet been cited by other publications. Figure 5. Ionic strength dependence of the energy transfer efficiency of RD (circle), RE (diamond), and KE (pentagon) using the three different models for FRET analysis from 0 to 300 mM ionic strength. The energy transfer efficiency for these sensors was calculated using the ensemble averaging approach (A) and the weighted (B) and unweighted (C) energy transfer rate determined approach. All measurements were acquired in buffer supplemented with KCl. The error bars represent the standard deviation between two experiments.

中文翻译：

---

对“使用荧光寿命测量法的霍夫迈斯特盐溶液系列中的离子强度传感器的FRET分析”的更正。

在此勘误中，我们将提交更正后的图5，如下所示。更正的版本已被合著者批准。图5.使用三种不同的FRET分析模型（从0到300 mM离子强度），RD（圆圈），RE（金刚石）和KE（五边形）的能量转移效率与离子强度的相关性。使用集成平均方法（A）和加权（B）和非加权（C）能量传输速率确定方法来计算这些传感器的能量传输效率。所有测量均在补充有KCl的缓冲液中进行。误差棒代表两个实验之间的标准偏差。本文尚未被其他出版物引用。图5.离子强度与RD（圆圈），RE（金刚石）的能量传递效率的关系，和KE（五边形），使用三种不同的模型进行0至300 mM离子强度的FRET分析。使用集成平均方法（A）和加权（B）和非加权（C）能量传输速率确定方法来计算这些传感器的能量传输效率。所有测量均在补充有KCl的缓冲液中进行。误差棒代表两个实验之间的标准偏差。