Pearse William D, Davis Charles C, Inouye David W, Primack Richard B, Davies T Jonathan
Department of Biology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, H3A 1B1, Canada.
Department of Biological Sciences, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Québec, H2X 1Y4, Canada.
Nat Ecol Evol. 2019 Mar;3(3):499. doi: 10.1038/s41559-019-0825-2.
In the version of this Article originally published, the rate of change plotted in Figure 2 was incorrect because of a coding error. The corrected figure is shown below. In the original Figure 2 legend, the onset of flowering slope was given as '0.99, 95% CI: 0.90-1.08', the cessation of flowering slope was given as '1.02, 95% CI: 0.91-1.13', and the r for each model was given as greater than 74%'. The correct values are '1.04, 95% CI: 0.97-1.12', '1.25, 95% CI: 0.87-1.62', and '60%', respectively. The main text and the conclusion that the slopes of these relationships are statistically indistinguishable from 1.00 are unchanged. These errors have now been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the article. The authors are grateful to A. Iler, who drew attention to this issue.
在本文最初发表的版本中，由于编码错误，图2中绘制的变化率有误。修正后的图如下所示。在原始图2的图例中，开花起始斜率给出为“0.99，95%置信区间：0.90 - 1.08”，开花终止斜率给出为“1.02，95%置信区间：0.91 - 1.13”，每个模型的r值给出为“大于74%”。正确的值分别为“1.04，95%置信区间：0.97 - 1.12”、“1.25，95%置信区间：0.87 - 1.62”和“60%”。正文以及关于这些关系的斜率在统计学上与1.00无显著差异的结论保持不变。这些错误现已在文章的PDF和HTML版本中得到修正。作者感谢A. Iler提醒注意这个问题。
