@misc{10498/29567,
year = {2023},
month = {7},
url = {http://hdl.handle.net/10498/29567},
abstract = {he authors regret to report the following errors: In Table 6, the doses of the UVB LEDs were interchanged with respect to a period of 0d and 5d of dark post-treatment. The correct version should be as follows [Table presented] As a result of this data exchange, two percentages in Section 3.2.4 were also modified. The correct versions are: Paragraph four (lines 4–8): Without a dark post-treatment, UVC LEDs were 81.9 % more efficient than UVB LEDs and 48.1 % more efficient than UVC LP mercury lamps. With a five day dark post-treatment, the UVC LEDs were 85.8 % more efficient than UVB LEDs and 36.8 % more efficient than UVC LP mercury lamps. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused},
publisher = {ELSEVIER},
title = {Corrigendum to “UV-LEDs combined with persulfate salts as a method to inactivate microalgae in ballast water”},
doi = {10.1016/j.jwpe.2022.103361},
author = {Rivas Zaballos, Ignacio and Romero Martínez, Leonardo and Moreno Garrido, Ignacio and Moreno Andrés, Javier and Acevedo Merino, Asunción and Nebot Sanz, Enrique},
}