In our previous article, Shear adhesive performance of leaf‐cutting ant workers (Atta cephalotes), a technical error occurred when calculating shear adhesive performance divided by tarsal pad area of worker ants carrying leaves (Stark, A. Y., Davis, H. R., & Harrison, W. K. (2019). Biotropica, 51(4), 572–580). Shear adhesive performance of worker ants carrying leaves was mistakenly divided by the tarsal pad area of workers riding on leaves. This has slightly changed our results. After correcting for this error, there is now no statistically significant difference in shear adhesive performance divided by tarsal pad area of worker ants riding on leaves and those carrying leaves. Shear adhesive performance of these groups remains statistically different than soldiers, and our original results (shear adhesive performance of all three groups differ from one another) are consistent with the reported trend in the original article using true pad area for each individual (rather than estimated). We list below the pages and figures in the original article that this correction applies to. All authors agree with this change, apologize for their error, and appreciate the opportunity granted by the editors and publisher to make this correction. Our original conclusion, that there is variation in shear adhesive performance per unit area among worker roles of Atta cephalotes, is still supported by these corrected results.

中文翻译：

---

更正：切叶蚁工人的剪切粘合性能（Atta cephalotes）

在我们之前的文章中，切叶蚁工人的剪切粘合性能（Atta cephalotes），在计算剪切胶粘剂性能除以携带叶子的工蚁的垫面积时发生了技术错误（Stark，AY，Davis，HR和Harrison， WK（2019）  。Biotropica，  51（4），572–580）。带叶子的工蚁的剪切粘合性能被除以骑在叶子上的工人的垫面积。这稍微改变了我们的结果。纠正此错误后，剪切粘合性能除以骑在叶子上的蚂蚁和携带叶子的工蚁的垫面积之和，现在没有统计学上的显着差异。这些组的剪切粘合性能在统计上仍与士兵不同，我们的原始结果（三组的剪切粘合性能彼此不同）与原始文章中报道的使用每个人的真实垫面积的趋势一致（而不是估计值） ）。我们在此更正适用的原始文章的页面和图形下方列出。所有作者都同意这一更改，对他们的错误深表歉意，并感谢编辑和出版商给予的改正机会。我们最初的结论是，工人的角色之间在单位面积上的剪切粘合性能存在差异。这些更正结果仍然支持Atta头足类动物。