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
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.