Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPrendergast, Kit
dc.contributor.authorDixon, Kingsley
dc.contributor.authorBateman, Bill
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-24T02:00:48Z
dc.date.available2022-01-24T02:00:48Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationPrendergast, K.S. and Dixon, K.W. and Bateman, P.W. 2021. Corrigendum to: Interactions between the introduced European honey bee and native bees in urban areas varies by year, habitat type and native bee guild. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 134 (3): p. 773.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/87425
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/biolinnean/blab120
dc.description.abstract

This paper was published in the July 2021 issue, Vol. 133, No. 3, pp. 725-743. In the originally published version of this manuscript, Figures 1C and 1D needed to have their labels switched. There were also errors in the paragraph that read: In the first year, honey bee abundance had a significant positive relationship with native bee species richness (estimate: 0.14; R2 = 0.19; P < 0.001; Fig. 1B). There was also a significant interaction with habitat (P = 0.01). Although the relationship remained significant and positive in both bushland remnants and residential gardens, the association was stronger in residential gardens (estimate: 0.22; R2 = 0.43, P < 0.001) compared with bushland remnants (estimate: 0.08; R2 = 0.16, P = 0.05; Fig. 1C). In contrast, in the second year, there was a significant negative, albeit weak, relationship between native bee species richness and honey bee abundance (estimate: −0.06; R2 = 0.05, P = 0.01; Fig. 1D). There was no interaction with habitat type (P = 0.95). Model outputs for the interaction variables and the relationship between honey bee abundance and native bee abundance and species richness can be found in Supporting Information 1 (Tables S2 and S3, respectively). This should have read: In the first year, honey bee abundance had a significant positive relationship with native bee species richness (estimate: 0.14; R2 = 0.19; P < 0.001) (Fig. 1B). There was also a significant interaction with habitat (P = 0.01). Although the relationship remained significant and positive in both bushland remnants and residential gardens, the association was stronger in residential gardens (estimate: 0.22; R2 = 0.43, P < 0.001) compared with bushland remnants (estimate: 0.08; R2 = 0.16, P = 0.05) (Fig. 1B). In contrast, in the second year, there was a significant negative, albeit weak, relationship between native bee species richness and honey bee abundance (estimate: −0.06; R2 = 0.05, P = 0.01) (Fig. 1D). There was no interaction with habitat type (P = 0.95). Model outputs for the interaction variables and the relationship between honey bee abundance and native bee abundance and species richness can be found in Supporting Information 1 (Table S2 and S3 respectively). These errors have now been corrected online.

dc.titleCorrigendum to: Interactions between the introduced European honey bee and native bees in urban areas varies by year, habitat type and native bee guild
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.volume134
dcterms.source.number3
dcterms.source.startPage773
dcterms.source.issn0024-4066
dcterms.source.titleBiological Journal of the Linnean Society
dc.date.updated2022-01-24T02:00:48Z
curtin.departmentSchool of Molecular and Life Sciences (MLS)
curtin.accessStatusOpen access via publisher
curtin.facultyFaculty of Science and Engineering
curtin.contributor.orcidDixon, Kingsley [0000-0001-5989-2929]
curtin.contributor.orcidBateman, Bill [0000-0002-3036-5479]
curtin.contributor.orcidPrendergast, Kit [0000-0002-1164-6099]
curtin.contributor.researcheridDixon, Kingsley [A-8133-2016] [B-1042-2011]
dcterms.source.eissn1095-8312
curtin.contributor.scopusauthoridDixon, Kingsley [35556048900] [55498810700] [57203078005]
curtin.contributor.scopusauthoridBateman, Bill [7006469998]


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record