Correction: Manawi et al. Evaluation of the Radon Levels in the Groundwater Wells of Qatar: Radiological Risk Assessment. Water 2023, 15, 4026

In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Figure 3b and Table 2 as published. The figure and table did not have correct pH, EC and TDS values for three groundwater wells. Table 2 now presents the correct values for groundwater wells in Qatar. Additionally, there have been modifications to the statistical analysis following the changes in the corrected physical parameters values. The corrected Figure 3b and Table 2 appears below:

Updated Table 2:

Table 2. Physico-chemical parameters of the surveyed groundwater wells.

Well ID	pH	EC (mS/cm)	TDS (mg/L)
592	7.99 ± 0.31	3.68 ± 0.23	2392 ± 150
661	7.74 ± 0.11	6.60 ± 0.02	4620 ± 14
677	7.77 ± 0.04	6.84 ± 0.08	4785 ± 53
819	7.58 ± 0.13	10.88 ± 0.02	7616 ± 14
903	7.79 ± 0.00	6.66 ± 0.11	4659 ± 74
1224	6.24 ± 0.65	41.70 ± 20.85	14,595 ± 146
1272	7.80 ± 0.15	5.23 ± 0.10	3658 ± 67
1449	7.82 ± 0.15	4.13 ± 0.08	2680 ± 51
1574	7.72 ± 0.04	2.50 ± 0.06	1625 ± 39
1762	7.82 ± 0.10	1.32 ± 0.05	711.7 ± 34
1803	6.82 ± 0.79	26.15 ± 2.15	18,305 ± 1505
1891	7.95 ± 0.19	1.64 ± 0.04	1068 ± 24
1993	7.96 ± 0.14	3.29 ± 0.03	2135 ± 23
2049	6.36 ± 2.75	36.63 ± 21.87	25,641 ± 1530
2121	7.44 ± 0.09	19.43 ± 0.05	13,601 ± 35
2217	7.84 ± 0.00	6.56 ± 0.04	4592 ± 28
2242	7.48 ± 0.38	3.35 ± 0.01	2178 ± 6.5
2357	7.83 ± 0.05	2.61 ± 0.06	1693 ± 34
2534	8.01 ± 0.12	1.34 ± 0.01	874 ± 9.1
2626	7.79 ± 0.09	6.11 ± 0.08	4277 ± 56
2709	7.54 ± 0.00	25.40 ± 0.10	17,780 ± 70
2874	7.90 ± 0.06	1.80 ± 0.02	1169 ± 12
2940	7.80 ± 0.08	4.25 ± 0.02	2760 ± 16
2990	7.80 ± 0.00	4.26 ± 0.14	2767 ± 88
3001	7.75 ± 0.02	4.86 ± 0.06	3159 ± 39
3189	7.74 ± 0.02	12.73 ± 0.20	8911 ± 140
3233	7.64 ± 0.02	10.56 ± 0.08	7390 ± 53
3266	7.71 ± 0.07	2.26 ± 0.09	1414 ± 6
3279	6.41 ± 3.21	4.35 ± 2.18	1413 ± 14.1
3327	7.44 ± 0.25	12.32 ± 0.37	8624 ± 259
3518	7.77 ± 0.12	3.68 ± 0.07	2389 ± 42
3800	7.75 ± 0.13	2.49 ± 0.09	1615 ± 55
3890	7.79 ± 0.08	9.62 ± 0.14	6730 ± 95
4083	7.97 ± 0.13	4.86 ± 0.05	3159 ± 33
4290	7.86 ± 0.09	2.55 ± 0.03	1658 ± 20
4473	7.82 ± 0.02	13.80 ± 0.19	9660 ± 133
4549	7.93 ± 0.10	2.95 ± 0.22	1918 ± 143
5146	7.93 ± 0.21	3.19 ± 0.07	2073 ± 46
5162	7.73 ± 0.30	6.94 ± 0.01	4858 ± 7
5551	7.79 ± 0.09	8.92 ± 0.01	6240 ± 10.5
5754	7.77 ± 0.11	5.22 ± 0.04	3651 ± 31.5
5799	7.65 ± 0.06	9.08 ± 0.14	6352 ± 95
6055	7.64 ± 0.03	19.42 ± 0.21	13,591 ± 144
6191	7.87 ± 0.07	7.80 ± 0.04	5465 ± 32
6199	7.83 ± 0.04	12.85 ± 0.06	8995 ± 42
6555	7.82 ± 0.06	11.46 ± 0.19	8019 ± 130
7418	7.34 ± 0.12	45.05 ± 0.25	31,535 ± 175
7584	7.82 ± 0.18	7.87 ± 0.04	5510 ± 50
8019	7.74 ± 0.03	4.61 ± 0.07	2993 ± 49
Statistical Analysis
Min	6.24	1.32	711.7
Max	8.01	45.05	31,535
Mean	7.65	9.42	6094
Standard Deviation	0.40	9.91	732

Table 2. Physico-chemical parameters of the surveyed groundwater wells.

Well ID	pH	EC (mS/cm)	TDS (mg/L)
592	7.99 ± 0.31	3.68 ± 0.23	2392 ± 150
661	7.74 ± 0.11	6.60 ± 0.02	4620 ± 14
677	7.77 ± 0.04	6.84 ± 0.08	4785 ± 53
819	7.58 ± 0.13	10.88 ± 0.02	7616 ± 14
903	7.79 ± 0.00	6.66 ± 0.11	4659 ± 74
1224	6.24 ± 0.65	41.70 ± 20.85	14,595 ± 146
1272	7.80 ± 0.15	5.23 ± 0.10	3658 ± 67
1449	7.82 ± 0.15	4.13 ± 0.08	2680 ± 51
1574	7.72 ± 0.04	2.50 ± 0.06	1625 ± 39
1762	7.82 ± 0.10	1.32 ± 0.05	711.7 ± 34
1803	6.82 ± 0.79	26.15 ± 2.15	18,305 ± 1505
1891	7.95 ± 0.19	1.64 ± 0.04	1068 ± 24
1993	7.96 ± 0.14	3.29 ± 0.03	2135 ± 23
2049	6.36 ± 2.75	36.63 ± 21.87	25,641 ± 1530
2121	7.44 ± 0.09	19.43 ± 0.05	13,601 ± 35
2217	7.84 ± 0.00	6.56 ± 0.04	4592 ± 28
2242	7.48 ± 0.38	3.35 ± 0.01	2178 ± 6.5
2357	7.83 ± 0.05	2.61 ± 0.06	1693 ± 34
2534	8.01 ± 0.12	1.34 ± 0.01	874 ± 9.1
2626	7.79 ± 0.09	6.11 ± 0.08	4277 ± 56
2709	7.54 ± 0.00	25.40 ± 0.10	17,780 ± 70
2874	7.90 ± 0.06	1.80 ± 0.02	1169 ± 12
2940	7.80 ± 0.08	4.25 ± 0.02	2760 ± 16
2990	7.80 ± 0.00	4.26 ± 0.14	2767 ± 88
3001	7.75 ± 0.02	4.86 ± 0.06	3159 ± 39
3189	7.74 ± 0.02	12.73 ± 0.20	8911 ± 140
3233	7.64 ± 0.02	10.56 ± 0.08	7390 ± 53
3266	7.71 ± 0.07	2.26 ± 0.09	1414 ± 6
3279	6.41 ± 3.21	4.35 ± 2.18	1413 ± 14.1
3327	7.44 ± 0.25	12.32 ± 0.37	8624 ± 259
3518	7.77 ± 0.12	3.68 ± 0.07	2389 ± 42
3800	7.75 ± 0.13	2.49 ± 0.09	1615 ± 55
3890	7.79 ± 0.08	9.62 ± 0.14	6730 ± 95
4083	7.97 ± 0.13	4.86 ± 0.05	3159 ± 33
4290	7.86 ± 0.09	2.55 ± 0.03	1658 ± 20
4473	7.82 ± 0.02	13.80 ± 0.19	9660 ± 133
4549	7.93 ± 0.10	2.95 ± 0.22	1918 ± 143
5146	7.93 ± 0.21	3.19 ± 0.07	2073 ± 46
5162	7.73 ± 0.30	6.94 ± 0.01	4858 ± 7
5551	7.79 ± 0.09	8.92 ± 0.01	6240 ± 10.5
5754	7.77 ± 0.11	5.22 ± 0.04	3651 ± 31.5
5799	7.65 ± 0.06	9.08 ± 0.14	6352 ± 95
6055	7.64 ± 0.03	19.42 ± 0.21	13,591 ± 144
6191	7.87 ± 0.07	7.80 ± 0.04	5465 ± 32
6199	7.83 ± 0.04	12.85 ± 0.06	8995 ± 42
6555	7.82 ± 0.06	11.46 ± 0.19	8019 ± 130
7418	7.34 ± 0.12	45.05 ± 0.25	31,535 ± 175
7584	7.82 ± 0.18	7.87 ± 0.04	5510 ± 50
8019	7.74 ± 0.03	4.61 ± 0.07	2993 ± 49
Statistical Analysis
Min	6.24	1.32	711.7
Max	8.01	45.05	31,535
Mean	7.65	9.42	6094
Standard Deviation	0.40	9.91	732

Updated Figure 3b:

In addition, there was a mistake in the legend/caption for Figure 7. The words “logarithmic axis” were not included in the caption. The correct legend appears below: Figure 7. The correlation between radon gas concentration in groundwater and (a) pH and (b) TDS (logarithmic axis).

The results and discussion part concerning the physical parameters range which was just updated needs to be amended in order to reflect the changes in the physical parameters. A correction has been made to Results and Discussions, Physico-Chemical Parameters (pH and SEC), paragraph 5: The analyzed groundwater wells in the present study showed a TDS range between 711.7 ± 34 and 31,535 ± 175 mg/L.

A correction has been made to Results and Discussions, Physico-Chemical Parameters (pH and SEC), paragraph 1: With regard to pH, the pH of all the studied samples was found to almost fall within the WHO/Qatari drinking water standards.

The correlation coefficients of Figure 7a must be updated in order to reflect the changes in the physical parameters updated earlier. A correction has been made to Results and Discussions, Radon measurement, paragraph 2: This can be supported by observing the coefficients of determination (R²) for both plots, which were 0.067 and 0.094.

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.