Figures
There is an error in the seventh sentence of the Abstract. The correct sentence is: Averaged across all crops, organic yield averaged 67% of conventional yield.
There is an error in the third sentence of the first paragraph of the Results and Discussion. The correct sentence is: Across all crops and all states, organic yield averaged 67% of conventional yield.
There is an error in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Results and Discussion. The correct sentence is: Organic crop yields were significantly less than conventional yields for 10 of 13 field and forage crops (Fig 1).
There is an error in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of the Results and Discussion. The correct sentence is: As a group, organic hay crops yielded similarly or significantly greater than conventional hay crops (Fig 1), though this was not true for the annual crop maize harvested for silage or haylage.
There are errors in the third sentence of the fifth paragraph of the Comparison with Previous Analyses section in the Results and Discussion. The correct sentence is: For example, grapes and alfalfa are both perennial crops, but the organic yield ratios for these crops varied dramatically (50% and 100% of conventional yields, respectively).
There are errors in the fourth sentence of the seventh paragraph of the Comparison with Previous Analyses section in the Results and Discussion. The correct sentence is: If the statistical significance is ignored and only the direction of the slope (increasing or decreasing) is considered, 16 out of 25 crops had negative slopes compared to 9 with positive slopes (Table 2).
Fig 1 is incorrect. The authors have provided a corrected version here.
Circles represent weighted ratio mean estimates, error bars represent 95% confidence limits for the weighted ratio; triangles represent the median crop yield ratio for all states included in the analysis.
There is an error in Table 2. The values listed in the row 9 "Haylage" are incorrect. Please see the corrected Table 2 here.
S1 Data is incorrect. The authors have provided a corrected version here.
S5 Fig is incorrect. The authors have provided a corrected version here.
S8 Fig is incorrect. The authors have provided a corrected version here.
S1 Supplementary Information is incorrect. The authors have provided a corrected version here.
Supporting Information
S1 Data. Organic and conventional yield data compiled from 2014 USDA surveys for analysis.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165851.s001
(XLSX)
S5 Fig. Distribution of the natural logarithm of the organic to conventional yield ratio for all forage crops.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165851.s002
(EPS)
S8 Fig. Influence of nitrogen fixation potential and crop longevity on organic:conventional yield ratio.
Green triangles adapted from Ponisio (2014); blue squares adapted from Seufert (2012); black circles represent analysis of USDA yield data (2014). Points are the ratio of organic:conventional yield, error bars represent 95% confidence intervals around those estimates.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165851.s003
(EPS)
S1 Supplementary Information. Tabular estimates for figures, and summarized data for crops not included in the statistical analysis.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165851.s004
(HTML)
Reference
Citation: Kniss AR, Savage SD, Jabbour R (2016) Correction: Commercial Crop Yields Reveal Strengths and Weaknesses for Organic Agriculture in the United States. PLoS ONE 11(11): e0165851. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165851
Published: November 8, 2016
Copyright: © 2016 Kniss et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.