10.1073͞pnas.0504604102), the authors note that Eq. 1 was incorrectly given as P ϭ f ssͩ ͩ1 ϩ m ͪ ϩ Dͩ 2 ϩ m ͪͪ both in the text and in Fig. 2. The correct equation is as follows:The corrected figure and its legend appear below. The error does not affect the conclusions of the article. Fig. 2.Comprehensive characterization of the promoter library. Several orthogonal metrics were used to characterize the promoter library and ensure the consistent behavior of all its members for various genes and culturing conditions. We show here three metrics that were chosen for quantifying transcriptional of the promoters: (i) the dynamics of GFP production based on fluorescence, (ii) measurement of the relative mRNA transcript levels in the cultures, and (iii) testing of the MIC for chloramphenicol in an additional library of constructs where the promoter drove the expression of chloramphenicol acetyltransferase. The overall strong correlation between the various metrics suggests a broad-range utility of the promoter library for a variety of genes and conditions. (A) Mouse C127 cells were transduced with retrovirus expressing BPV-1 E7 with a FLAG͞HA epitope tag at either the C terminus (E7-C) or N terminus (E7-N), or with no tag (E7). Cells were lysed, and proteins were immunoprecipitated by using either an anti-FLAG antibody (Left) or an anti-BPV-1 E7 antibody (Right). Proteins were resolved by SDS͞PAGE on a 15% polyacrylamide gel and probed by immunoblotting using the anti-E7 antibody. (B) Cells were assayed for anchorage-independent growth with transduced BPV-1 oncogenes: C127 control cells, cells expressing BPV-1 E7 alone, BPV-1 E6 alone, E6 and E7, E6 and C-terminal FLAG͞HA-tagged E7 (E7-C), and E6 and N-terminal FLAG͞HA-tagged E7 (E7-N). Cells were suspended in 0.3% Noble agar, DMEM, and 10% FBS and grown for 14 days. Representative fields are shown at ϫ10 magnification. For further details, see Cortical analysis related to visual object recognition is traditionally thought to propagate serially along a bottom-up hierarchy of ventral areas. Recent proposals gradually promote the role of top-down processing in recognition, but how such facilitation is triggered remains a puzzle. We tested a specific model, proposing that low spatial frequencies facilitate visual object recognition by initiating top-down processes projected from orbitofrontal to visual cortex. The present study combined magnetoencephalography, which has superior temporal resolution, functional magnetic resonance imaging, and a behavioral task that yields successful recognition with stimulus repetitions. Object recognition elicited differential activity that developed in the left orbitofrontal cortex 50 ms earlier than it did in recognition-related areas in the temporal cortex. This early orbitofrontal activity was directly modulated by the presence of low spatial frequencies in the image. Taken together, the dynamics we revealed provide strong support for the proposal of how top-down facilitation of object recognition is initiated, and our observations a...

No abstract