Erratum: A biomimetic approach to shielding from ionizing radiation: The case of melanized fungi (PLoS ONE (2020) 15:4 (e0229921) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229921)

6Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Fig 2 is incorrect. Specifically, Fig 2A, which depicts the different geometric configurations discussed in the article, plots the axis defining the parameter hr in reverse and shows the examples of the two extreme "film positions"(marked as hr = 0 and hr = 1 in panel (A)) in the opposite order. The authors have provided a corrected version here. As a result, in the third paragraph of the subsection "Spatial arrangement of melanin affects shielding effectiveness"in the "Results", the phrase reading "We repeated the simulations for the aforementioned values of ρA for two configurations: melanin ghosts and film with hr = 0."should be corrected to "We repeated the simulations for the aforementioned values of ρA for two configurations: melanin ghosts and film with hr = 1.".

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vasileiou, T., & Summerer, L. (2021, August 1). Erratum: A biomimetic approach to shielding from ionizing radiation: The case of melanized fungi (PLoS ONE (2020) 15:4 (e0229921) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229921). PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257068

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free