The SER Standards: a globally relevant and inclusive tool for improving restoration practice—a reply to Higgs et al.

Abstract

Restoration EcologyVolume 26, Issue 4 p. 798-798 CORRIGENDUMFree Access The SER Standards: a globally relevant and inclusive tool for improving restoration practice—a reply to Higgs et al. This article corrects the following: The SER Standards: a globally relevant and inclusive tool for improving restoration practice—a reply to Higgs et al. George D. Gann, Tein McDonald, James Aronson, Kingsley W. Dixon, Bethanie Walder, James G. Hallett, Kris Decleer, Donald A. Falk, Emily K. Gonzales, Carolina Murcia, Cara R. Nelson, Alan J. Unwin, Volume 26Issue 3Restoration Ecology pages: 426-430 First Published online: May 21, 2018 First published: 10 July 2018 https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12837AboutSectionsPDF 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 Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat In Gann et al. (2018), the funding statement was missing from the Acknowledgement section. “KWD is funded by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council Industry Transformation Training Centre for Mine Site Restoration ICI150100041.” We apologize for this error. LITERATURE CITED Gann GD, McDonald T, Aronson J, Dixon KW, Walder B, Hallett JG, et al. (2018) The SER Standards: a globally relevant and inclusive tool for improving restoration practice—a reply to Higgs et al. Restoration Ecology 26: 426– 430 Volume26, Issue4July 2018Pages 798-798 Restoration Ecology - Message to authors, reviewers, editorial board During this time of mass disruption, be advised that we appreciate there will be a slower pace for all. Restoration Ecology understands that reviews and decisions may be delayed; responses from authors may be delayed. There are no consequences for delays. We ask all to be patient. The EIC and Managing Editor work remotely as is (in different countries) so we already work from ‘home’. We are attempting to add this message to our communications (not as easy because the Editors don’t have total editing rights) and reduce the normal reminder emails to reflect this uncertain time. If you receive our normal email correspondence reminding you of deadlines, we are waiving these and asking only that you let us know, if possible, of delays exceeding a month. Stephen Murphy, EIC ReferencesRelatedInformation