Article first published online: 8 MAY 2008
Journal compilation © 2008 New Phytologist Trust
Volume 178, Issue 4, page 897, June 2008
How to Cite
(2008), Corrigendum. New Phytologist, 178: 897. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02469.x
- Issue published online: 8 MAY 2008
- Article first published online: 8 MAY 2008
Vol. 178, Issue 2, 358–370, Article first published online: 5 MAR 2008
New Phytologist 178 (2008), 358–370
Since its publication, the authors of Aylott et al. (2008) have brought to our attention errors in their article, where the resolution in the legends to Figs 2 and 3 is incorrect with the omission of a decimal point. The legends should read (2.5 × 2.5 km resolution). In addition, the descriptions of the red and blue shading in the legend to Fig. 3 are incorrectly reversed: areas shaded blue are the most suitable, and areas shaded red, the least suitable, locations. The correct Fig. 3 is printed below.
Fig. 3 Spatial productivity map (2.5 × 2.5 km resolution) combining the three highest-yielding extensively grown genotypes. Areas shaded white are excluded as they are above 250 m, urban or predominantly inland water. Areas shaded blue are those identified through Getis-Ord Gi* hot spot analysis as the most suitable for the construction of new bioenergy power stations based on crop productivity (highest-ranking 2% based on Getis-Ord Gi* scores). Conversely, land shaded red is the least suitable (lowest ranking 2%).
We apologize to our readers for these mistakes.