doi:10.1017/S1751731117002051, published by Cambridge University Press, 10 August 2017

Authors of a cited reference (Hannon, B. M., and M. R. Murphy. 2016. Toward a theory of energetically optimal body size in growing animals. J. Anim. Sci. 94(6):2532-2541) disagreed with the wording used to summarise and highlight their findings. An exchange of correspondence took place between MR Murphy and K. Huber, which resulted in a reformulation.

The correct formulation is shown below:

“Hannon and Murphy (2016) discussed the idea that maintenance energy cost per unit of body size decreases initially with increasing size. This might be in favor of thermoregulation. Maintenance energy cost per unit size reaches a nadir from where it rises again when body size increases above the optimal body size. At optimal body size MEm per unit size is minimal.”

The original text in the section ‘Juvenile growth and development’ was :

“Physiologically, body growth most likely aimed to establish an energetically optimal body size in young animals (Hannon and Murphy, 2016). Hannon and Murphy (2016) re-discussed the idea that maintenance energy costs (R) decrease with increasing body size (S) in favor of thermoregulation. R/S reaches a nadir from where is [sic] rises again when body size increases above the optimal body size. At optimal body size MEm is minimal.”

The author apologises for the error.