Erratum: Zoophytophagous mites can trigger plant‐genotype specific defensive responses affecting potential prey beyond predation: the case of Euseius stipulatus and Tetranychus urticae in citrus

Pest Management ScienceVolume 77, Issue 5 p. 2591-2592 ErratumFree Access Erratum: Zoophytophagous mites can trigger plant-genotype specific defensive responses affecting potential prey beyond predation: the case of Euseius stipulatus and Tetranychus urticae in citrus This article corrects following: Joaquín Cruz-Miralles, Marc Cabedo-López, Meritxell Pérez-Hedo, Víctor Flors, Josep A Jaques, Volume 75Issue 7Pest Science pages: 1962-1970 First Published online: February 7, 2019 published: 28 January 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6292AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text full-text accessPlease review our Terms Conditions Use check box below share version article.I have read accept Wiley Online Library UseShareable LinkUse link a this with your friends colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat The authors Cruz-Miralles et al 1 regret that Figs. 2 their contain incorrect data. These errors do not affect overall results reported, nor conclusions made. corrected Figs are provided below. Figure 1Open figure viewerPowerPoint Olfactory adult females stipulatus. Five different combinations, which T. had choose between two odor sources, were tested. Four replicates 10 responding per choice combination tested (see supplementary online material). subjected starvation period 24 h prior onset assay. From top bottom these combinations were: empty glass versus E. stipulatus, Cleopatra mandarin uninfested plants (Cleo) sour orange (SO), SO SO-infested (SO Inf), Cleo Cleo-infested (Cleo inf inf. Plants. Infested been exposed 25 for 48 before Results each olfactometer test initially logistic regression effect replicate on mite preference. Lack signification (P > 0.05) material) was prerequisite pool four replicates, then chi-squared analysis whether they departed from 1:1 distribution. 2Open conspecifics. Additionally, data resulted inaccuracies as follows: In subsection 3.1, opening sentence “In agreement initial hypothesis odors would prove repellent urticae, two-spotted spider avoided when predator alone (Fig. 1).” should correctly showed strong non-significant repellence = 0.058) third “Indeed, simultaneously infested genotypes, no preference observed, whereas observed same genotypes uninfested.” mandarine uninfected.” Section 4, second fourth paragraph hypotheses, it repelled by its chose less-defended rather than Supporting Information Filename Description ps6292-sup-0001-Supinfo.odtODT document, 91.6 KB Appendix S1: Supplementary Please note: publisher is responsible content or functionality any supporting information supplied authors. Any queries (other missing content) be directed corresponding author article. REFERENCE 1Cruz-Miralles J, Cabedo-López M, Pérez-Hedo Flors V Jaques JA, citrus. Manage Sci 75: 1962– 1970 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5309. LibraryCASPubMedWeb Science®Google Scholar Volume77, Issue5May 2021Pages FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation