TY - JOUR
T1 - Erratum
T2 - Leveraging abscisic acid receptors for efficient water use in Arabidopsis Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2016) 113 (6791-6796) Doi: 10.1073/pnas.1601954113)
AU - Yang, Zhenyu
AU - Liu, Jinghui
AU - Tischer, Stefanie V.
AU - Christmann, Alexander
AU - Windisch, Wilhelm
AU - Schnyder, Hans
AU - Grill, Erwin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/8/27
Y1 - 2019/8/27
N2 - The authors wish to note the following: "Fig. 1B claims to show the relationship of relative soil water content (SWC, vol/vol) and, erroneously, of soil water potential Ψ. In fact, the data present the soil matric potential instead of Ψ. The same mistake happened in Fig. 3B and Fig. 3C. Water potential is an indicator of the water availability and the sum of the matric potential, the osmotic potential, the pressure potential, and the gravimetric potential (1). The water potential of water-unsaturated soils is mainly determined by the matric potential and the osmotic potential. In our analysis, a pF meter was used for measuring the matric potential, which reflects the potential energy of liquid water binding to insoluble soil particles. The water potential Ψ of the soil was determined using a psychrometer (HR-33T, Wescor). The Ψ value of the soil at 67, 60, and 15% SWC has been determined as -0.07 MPa, -0.08 MPa, and -0.55 MPa, respectively, and the data are now included in Fig. 1B. In Fig. 3C, the dotted vertical lines indicate now correctly threshold Ψ values for mild and severe water deficit of -0.08 MPa and -0.55 MPa, respectively. We apologize for the mistake. This error does not affect the conclusions of the article." The corrected Fig. 1 and Fig. 3 appear below with their respective corrected legends.
AB - The authors wish to note the following: "Fig. 1B claims to show the relationship of relative soil water content (SWC, vol/vol) and, erroneously, of soil water potential Ψ. In fact, the data present the soil matric potential instead of Ψ. The same mistake happened in Fig. 3B and Fig. 3C. Water potential is an indicator of the water availability and the sum of the matric potential, the osmotic potential, the pressure potential, and the gravimetric potential (1). The water potential of water-unsaturated soils is mainly determined by the matric potential and the osmotic potential. In our analysis, a pF meter was used for measuring the matric potential, which reflects the potential energy of liquid water binding to insoluble soil particles. The water potential Ψ of the soil was determined using a psychrometer (HR-33T, Wescor). The Ψ value of the soil at 67, 60, and 15% SWC has been determined as -0.07 MPa, -0.08 MPa, and -0.55 MPa, respectively, and the data are now included in Fig. 1B. In Fig. 3C, the dotted vertical lines indicate now correctly threshold Ψ values for mild and severe water deficit of -0.08 MPa and -0.55 MPa, respectively. We apologize for the mistake. This error does not affect the conclusions of the article." The corrected Fig. 1 and Fig. 3 appear below with their respective corrected legends.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071439385&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1073/pnas.1912311116
DO - 10.1073/pnas.1912311116
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 31427522
AN - SCOPUS:85071439385
SN - 0027-8424
VL - 116
SP - 17601
EP - 17602
JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
IS - 35
ER -