Artigo

Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)

This Article contains errors in the Results section under subheading ‘Visual Modelling’. “For snakes, the visual model did not reveal any significance in terms of chromaticity between red and non-red feet. But, in terms of achromatic information, for the snake the contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94...

ver descrição completa

Autor principal: Rößler, Daniela C.
Outros Autores: Lötters, Stefan, Mappes, Johanna, Valkonen, Janne K., Menin, Marcelo, Lima, Albertina Pimental, Pröhl, Heike
Grau: Artigo
Idioma: English
Publicado em: Scientific Reports 2020
Assuntos:
Erratum
Acesso em linha: https://repositorio.inpa.gov.br/handle/1/15229
id oai:repositorio:1-15229
recordtype dspace
spelling oai:repositorio:1-15229 Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1) Rößler, Daniela C. Lötters, Stefan Mappes, Johanna Valkonen, Janne K. Menin, Marcelo Lima, Albertina Pimental Pröhl, Heike Erratum This Article contains errors in the Results section under subheading ‘Visual Modelling’. “For snakes, the visual model did not reveal any significance in terms of chromaticity between red and non-red feet. But, in terms of achromatic information, for the snake the contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly higher than the contrast of non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) against foliage background (U = 149, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed). Against dorsal dark coloration, the achromatic contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly smaller than for non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) (U = 148, p #x003C;0.001 two-tailed).’’ should read: “For snakes, the visual model did not reveal any significance in terms of chromaticity between red and non-red feet. But, in terms of achromatic information, for the snake the contrast of red feet (25.92 ± 7.97, N = 32) was significantly higher than the contrast of non-red feet (18.43 ± 9.29, N = 20) against foliage background (U = 149, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed). Against dorsal dark coloration, the achromatic contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly smaller than for non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) (U = 148, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed).’’. © 2019, The Author(s). 2020-05-07T14:14:52Z 2020-05-07T14:14:52Z 2019 Artigo https://repositorio.inpa.gov.br/handle/1/15229 10.1038/s41598-019-55021-0 en Volume 9, Número 1 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Brazil http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/br/ application/pdf Scientific Reports
institution Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia - Repositório Institucional
collection INPA-RI
language English
topic Erratum
spellingShingle Erratum
Rößler, Daniela C.
Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
topic_facet Erratum
description This Article contains errors in the Results section under subheading ‘Visual Modelling’. “For snakes, the visual model did not reveal any significance in terms of chromaticity between red and non-red feet. But, in terms of achromatic information, for the snake the contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly higher than the contrast of non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) against foliage background (U = 149, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed). Against dorsal dark coloration, the achromatic contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly smaller than for non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) (U = 148, p #x003C;0.001 two-tailed).’’ should read: “For snakes, the visual model did not reveal any significance in terms of chromaticity between red and non-red feet. But, in terms of achromatic information, for the snake the contrast of red feet (25.92 ± 7.97, N = 32) was significantly higher than the contrast of non-red feet (18.43 ± 9.29, N = 20) against foliage background (U = 149, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed). Against dorsal dark coloration, the achromatic contrast of red feet (11.10 ± 7.94 JND, N = 32) was significantly smaller than for non-red feet (20.86 ± 10.89 JND, N = 20) (U = 148, p #x003C; 0.001 two-tailed).’’. © 2019, The Author(s).
format Artigo
author Rößler, Daniela C.
author2 Lötters, Stefan
Mappes, Johanna
Valkonen, Janne K.
Menin, Marcelo
Lima, Albertina Pimental
Pröhl, Heike
author2Str Lötters, Stefan
Mappes, Johanna
Valkonen, Janne K.
Menin, Marcelo
Lima, Albertina Pimental
Pröhl, Heike
title Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
title_short Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
title_full Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
title_fullStr Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
title_full_unstemmed Author Correction: Sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a Neotropical toad (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
title_sort author correction: sole coloration as an unusual aposematic signal in a neotropical toad (scientific reports, (2019), 9, 1, (1128), 10.1038/s41598-018-37705-1)
publisher Scientific Reports
publishDate 2020
url https://repositorio.inpa.gov.br/handle/1/15229
_version_ 1787142748180054016
score 11.755432

Registros relacionados