Next Article in Journal
Invasion of Bythotrephes longimanus and Cercopagis pengoi in Lake Champlain: Impacts on the Native Zooplankton Community
Previous Article in Journal
The Release and Spread of Basidiospores of Red-Listed Wood-Decay Fungus Fistulina hepatica in Oak Stands
Previous Article in Special Issue
Contrasted Impacts of Yellow Flag Iris (Iris pseudacorus) on Plant Diversity in Tidal Wetlands within Its Native and Invaded Distribution Ranges
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Correction

Correction: Jobe et al. Herbivory by Geese Inhibits Tidal Freshwater Wetland Restoration Success. Diversity 2022, 14, 278

1
Biological Sciences Department, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA
2
National Park Service, National Capital Parks-East, Washington, DC 20020, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2023, 15(11), 1111; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15111111
Submission received: 14 August 2023 / Accepted: 27 September 2023 / Published: 25 October 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation and Ecological Restoration of Intertidal Marshes)

Error in Figures

In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Figure 2 as published. The average and standard error for June 2009 and August 2009 were switched in the figure. The corrected Figure 2 appears below. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
In the original publication, there was a mistake in Figure 3 as published. The average and standard error for June 2009 and August 2009 were switched in the figure. The corrected Figure 3 appears below. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.

Reference

  1. Jobe, J.; Krafft, C.; Milton, M.; Gedan, K. Herbivory by Geese Inhibits Tidal Freshwater Wetland Restoration Success. Diversity 2022, 14, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 2. Total percent cover through time in fenced (lighter colors) and unfenced (darker colors) plots of initially vegetated (green) and initially unvegetated (blue) modules. June 2009 data are included as a baseline; all other data presented were collected in August to reflect that year’s growing season. Labels of “NS” indicate a non-significant difference between control and exclosure treatments on that sampling date, color-coded to indicate initially vegetated state; on all other dates, differences were statistically significant. t-test statistics are reported in Table S2. Error bars are standard error.
Figure 2. Total percent cover through time in fenced (lighter colors) and unfenced (darker colors) plots of initially vegetated (green) and initially unvegetated (blue) modules. June 2009 data are included as a baseline; all other data presented were collected in August to reflect that year’s growing season. Labels of “NS” indicate a non-significant difference between control and exclosure treatments on that sampling date, color-coded to indicate initially vegetated state; on all other dates, differences were statistically significant. t-test statistics are reported in Table S2. Error bars are standard error.
Diversity 15 01111 g002
Figure 3. Percent cover of annual species through time in fenced (lighter colors) and unfenced (darker colors) plots of initially vegetated (green) and initially unvegetated (blue) modules. June 2009 data are included as a baseline; all other data presented were collected in August to reflect that year’s growing season. Labels of “NS” indicate a nonsignificant difference between control and exclosure treatments on that sampling date and color-coded to indicate initially vegetated state; on all other dates, differences were statistically significant. t-test statistics are reported in Table S2. Error bars are standard error.
Figure 3. Percent cover of annual species through time in fenced (lighter colors) and unfenced (darker colors) plots of initially vegetated (green) and initially unvegetated (blue) modules. June 2009 data are included as a baseline; all other data presented were collected in August to reflect that year’s growing season. Labels of “NS” indicate a nonsignificant difference between control and exclosure treatments on that sampling date and color-coded to indicate initially vegetated state; on all other dates, differences were statistically significant. t-test statistics are reported in Table S2. Error bars are standard error.
Diversity 15 01111 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jobe, J.; Krafft, C.; Milton, M.; Gedan, K. Correction: Jobe et al. Herbivory by Geese Inhibits Tidal Freshwater Wetland Restoration Success. Diversity 2022, 14, 278. Diversity 2023, 15, 1111. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15111111

AMA Style

Jobe J, Krafft C, Milton M, Gedan K. Correction: Jobe et al. Herbivory by Geese Inhibits Tidal Freshwater Wetland Restoration Success. Diversity 2022, 14, 278. Diversity. 2023; 15(11):1111. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15111111

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jobe, Justus, Cairn Krafft, Mikaila Milton, and Keryn Gedan. 2023. "Correction: Jobe et al. Herbivory by Geese Inhibits Tidal Freshwater Wetland Restoration Success. Diversity 2022, 14, 278" Diversity 15, no. 11: 1111. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15111111

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop