Correction to: Urban Ecosystems
On page 3 (Field Methods Section), we state that:
“We used a geographic information system (GIS) to randomly distribute points at an average density of 0.5 points/ha in priority preserves and 0.2 points/ha in non-priority preserves.”
Instead, it should state that:
“We used a geographic information system (GIS) to randomly distribute points at a density of 1 point/40.5 ha (100 acres) in priority preserves and 1 point/81 ha (200 acres) in non-priority preserves.”
This does not change the results or implications of the study, as anyone trying to replicate our results would immediately realize we could not have set that many camera traps across 55 preserves. In addition, Fig. 1 clearly shows the location of all points and thus the actual density. We apologise for any confusion this may have caused.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-01026-x
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vanek, J.P., Rutter, A.U., Preuss, T.S. et al. Correction to: Anthropogenic factors influence the occupancy of an invasive carnivore in a suburban preserve system. Urban Ecosyst 24, 1083 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01099-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01099-2