Roderick, M.L., Berry, S.L., Saunders, A.R. & Noble, I.R. (1999) On the relationship between the composition, morphology and function of leaves. Functional Ecology13, 696–710.
When the above paper was published in the journal, it contained errors in the estimates of leaf volume and the quantities that were calculated using those estimates (e.g. calculated leaf thickness, leaf density, fractional air space). We used the formula given by Raskin (1983) to calculate the leaf volume (Vl) from laboratory measurements (see Raskin (1983) and Eqn A2·3 in our paper for further details) as follows:
That formula is wrong, but we did not detect the error. The correct formula is:
(eqn A2·3 (fixed))
Using the correct estimates of leaf volume, the density of the non-gaseous fraction for the leaves now agrees with theoretical expectations (see below). Despite the error, the interpretation of the results is not materially altered. Amendments to the original paper are described below.
Amendments to the original text
1. Delete the last sentence in the left-hand column on page 702 which begins as ‘Note that [Nqd]….’.
2. Delete all the text contained in the LEAF DENSITY, AIR SPACE AND LIQUID CONTENT section of the Discussion which begins on page 703 in the original paper and replace it with the following text:
The specific gravity of the non-gaseous fraction (ρ′qd) varied from 0·9 to 1·2. If samples 19A and 20A are excluded (see Fig. 1 caption), then the range in ρ′qd is 1·0–1·2 and ρ′qd generally increased with fractional air space (Fa). Those trends are consistent with theoretical expectations (Roderick et al. 1999). Because of the above trends, the specific gravity of the leaves varied over a relatively small range (≈ 0·8–1·1). Using a mechanical argument, Roderick et al. (1999) proposed that Fa should decline as the liquid content (Q) increased. The data show that for Q between 0·45 and 0·8, there is no distinct decline in Fa. Consequently, any decline in Fa with increases in Q may not occur until Q is very nearly unity (e.g. in a lettuce leaf).
3. Delete the last sentence at the bottom of page 706 which begins with ‘That is consistent …’.
Corrections to tables and figures
The correct estimates of Vl for each leaf are listed in Table 3 of this erratum which replaces Table 3 in the original paper. Estimates of Vl in Table 1 of the original paper should also be adjusted.
Table 3. Specific gravity of the leaf (ρ′l), non-gaseous fraction (ρ′qd) and fractional air space (Fa) for the leaves in database B (n = 38). Vl (mm3) is listed here for convenience. The standard deviations were estimated using theory described in Appendix 2
Many of the figures in the original paper used the calculated leaf thickness (= Volume/Area) along the x-axis. The calculated leaf thickness will change slightly. New figures (1, 2abc, 3ab, 4ab, 7abcd, 8, 11b) which replace those in the original paper are available on request to the authors. Modified regression equations are: Fig. 3b, y = 0·41 + 3·0E − 5, R2 = 0·63, n = 27; Fig. 8, y = 1·50x + 143, R3 = 0·86, n = 32; Fig. 11b, y = −0·08 + 5·7E − 6x, R2 = 0·89, n = 27. Original Figs 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11(a) are unchanged.
We apologize for any confusion or inconvenience caused by this error.