Corrigendum.

Abstract

Ecology LettersVolume 23, Issue 9 p. 1426-1427 CorrigendumFree Access Corrigendum This article corrects the following: Trait plasticity alters the range of possible coexistence conditions in a competition–colonisation trade-off Ranjan Muthukrishnan, Lauren L. Sullivan, Allison K. Shaw, James D. Forester, Jessica Metcalf, Volume 23Issue 5Ecology Letters pages: 791-799 First Published online: February 21, 2020 First published: 17 July 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13569AboutSectionsPDF Comments ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL In ‘Trait plasticity alters the range of possible coexistence conditions in a competition–colonisation trade-off’ Muthukrishnan et al. (2020) which was published in Volume 23, issue 5 (May 2020), the authors would like to correct a coding error, discovered after publication in the analyses. Evaluation of mutual invasibility for specific conditions and landscapes in Simulations 1 and 2 of the manuscript involved aligning the outcomes of 2 separate simulations (one with each of the species as the resident or invading species). When outcomes were compared, the coding error led to a misalignment of some simulation output files. This in turn led to an underestimate of mutual invasibility. However, this error had consistent effects across all conditions and scenarios such that the differences between plastic and fixed strategies were essentially unimpacted. Thus, none of our conclusions or interpretations were affected, but some specific numeric values that were reported were incorrect. After correcting the analysis, the second paragraph within the Results section for Simulation 1 should read: Across all scenarios, even when trade-off magnitude equals zero and all strategies are equivalent to the average strategy, mutual invasibility was only observed in ~60% of simulations. This indicates the strong influence of stochastic dynamics. Thus, observing even moderate levels of coexistence suggests significant stabilisation. Here is the corrected version of Figure 2: For Simulation 2, after correction the numbers of simulations with mutual invasibility for each scenario are: Competitor=82, Dominator=4934, Colonizer=3801, and Spreader=6562. The corrected paragraph for the Results section Simulation 2 should read: Simulation 2: Coexistence under different landscape configurations Again, plastic strategies allowed for coexistence across a broader range of landscape patterns compared to fixed strategies (Fig. 3). This is particularly clear when comparing the competitor strategy, which showed coexistence in only a narrow window of landscapes with very high or very low proportion of usable habitat (82 total landscapes; Fig. 3a), with the dominator strategy which had coexistence across almost all landscape conditions except those with very little usable habitat that is highly clumped (4934 total landscapes; Fig. 3b). The coloniser (Fig. 3c) and spreader (Fig. 3d) strategies showed more similar patterns of coexistence across landscape types, but the plastic (spreader) strategy had more coexistence (6562 vs 3801 landscapes) across nearly all landscape conditions while the coloniser strategy largely displayed coexistence in landscapes with large amounts of usable habitat that was highly autocorrelated. Here is the corrected version of Figure 3: Additionally, in Table 2, the values for the dispersal kernel base rate parameter (λbase) should 0.00694 for all simulations. This value was correctly reported in the text of the manuscript, but the wrong value was originally included in the table. Reference Muthukrishnan, R., Sullivan, L.L., Shaw, A.K. & Forester, J.D. (2020). Trait plasticity alters the range of possible coexistence conditions in a competition–colonisation trade-off. Ecol Lett, 23, 791– 799. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13477. Comments Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. Volume23, Issue9September 2020Pages 1426-1427 ReferencesRelatedInformation