The authors regret that < a wrong sign conditioned some sentences present in the text so that 1. In the abstract, the correct empirical thermodynamic equations are:pHTOT = pHNIST – 0.10383 – 4.33·10−5 TS – 3.633·10−5 T2 + 4.921·10−5 S2 pHSWS = pHNIST – 0.097733 – 4.1059·10−5 TS – 3.5437·10−5 T2 + 4.941·10−5 S2 2. In Figs. 1, 2(a) and 2(b) the sign in the Y axis is negative [Figure presented] Fig. 1 [Figure presented] Fig. 2 3. The correct coefficients a, b, c and d reported on page 4 after eq. (24) are a = – 0.10383 b = – 4.33·10−5 c = – 3.633·10−5 d = + 4.921·10−54. The correct equation (26) isΔpHSWS = – 0.097733 – 4.1059·10−5 TS – 3.5437·10−5 T2 + 4.941·10−5 S2 5. On page 4 the text:“ …. Data in Fig. 2(a) show that the effect of S on ΔpHTOT is more important at low T. In fact, an increase of salinity from 20 to 40 PSU at 5 °C decreases ΔpHTOT from 0.085 to 0.035, while at T = 40 °C the same S increase decreases ΔpHTOT from 0.165 to 0.145. The variable which mostly affects ΔpHTOT is T. If S is 35 PSU, ΔpHTOT increases from 0.05 at 5 °C to 0.16 at 40 °C.… …. ” is replaced corrected as “ …. Data in Fig. 2(a) show that the effect of S on ΔpHTOT is more important at low T. In fact, an increase of salinity from 20 to 40 PSU at 5 °C increases ΔpHTOT from −0.085 to −0.035, while at T = 40 °C the same S increase increases ΔpHTOT from −0.165 to −0.145. The variable which mostly affects ΔpHTOT is T. If S is 35 PSU, ΔpHTOT decreases from −0.05 at 5 °C to −0.16 at 40 °C. …” 6. In Table 1 the value 0.1037 is actually −0.1037.>.The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

Corrigendum to “Use of a simple empirical model for the accurate conversion of the seawater pH value measured with NIST calibration into seawater pH scales” [Talanta 225 (2021) 122051] (Talanta (2021) 225, (S0039914020313424), (10.1016/j.talanta.2020.122051))

Badocco D.;Pastore A.;di Marco V.;Marin M. G.;Bogialli S.;Roverso M.;Pastore P.
2021

Abstract

The authors regret that < a wrong sign conditioned some sentences present in the text so that 1. In the abstract, the correct empirical thermodynamic equations are:pHTOT = pHNIST – 0.10383 – 4.33·10−5 TS – 3.633·10−5 T2 + 4.921·10−5 S2 pHSWS = pHNIST – 0.097733 – 4.1059·10−5 TS – 3.5437·10−5 T2 + 4.941·10−5 S2 2. In Figs. 1, 2(a) and 2(b) the sign in the Y axis is negative [Figure presented] Fig. 1 [Figure presented] Fig. 2 3. The correct coefficients a, b, c and d reported on page 4 after eq. (24) are a = – 0.10383 b = – 4.33·10−5 c = – 3.633·10−5 d = + 4.921·10−54. The correct equation (26) isΔpHSWS = – 0.097733 – 4.1059·10−5 TS – 3.5437·10−5 T2 + 4.941·10−5 S2 5. On page 4 the text:“ …. Data in Fig. 2(a) show that the effect of S on ΔpHTOT is more important at low T. In fact, an increase of salinity from 20 to 40 PSU at 5 °C decreases ΔpHTOT from 0.085 to 0.035, while at T = 40 °C the same S increase decreases ΔpHTOT from 0.165 to 0.145. The variable which mostly affects ΔpHTOT is T. If S is 35 PSU, ΔpHTOT increases from 0.05 at 5 °C to 0.16 at 40 °C.… …. ” is replaced corrected as “ …. Data in Fig. 2(a) show that the effect of S on ΔpHTOT is more important at low T. In fact, an increase of salinity from 20 to 40 PSU at 5 °C increases ΔpHTOT from −0.085 to −0.035, while at T = 40 °C the same S increase increases ΔpHTOT from −0.165 to −0.145. The variable which mostly affects ΔpHTOT is T. If S is 35 PSU, ΔpHTOT decreases from −0.05 at 5 °C to −0.16 at 40 °C. …” 6. In Table 1 the value 0.1037 is actually −0.1037.>.The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11577/3420696
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact