Error in Table
In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in “Table 6. Carcinogenic risks of some potentially to × ic metals in dry Crataegus samples.” as published. Table 5 was re-copied instead of Table 6. The corrected “Table 6. Carcinogenic risks of some potentially toxic metals in dry Crataegus samples.” appears below (Table 6). The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
Table 6.
Carcinogenic risks of some potentially toxic metals in dry Crataegus samples.
| Samples | Gender | Cr | Pb | Cd | Ni | As |
| C. tanacetifolia | M | 1.80 × 10−6 | 1.10 × 10−10 | 4.90 × 10−9 | 3.10 × 10−5 | 2.10 × 10−7 |
| FM | 2.10 × 10−6 | 1.30 × 10−10 | 1.50 × 10−8 | 4.80 × 10−5 | 2.50 × 10−7 | |
| C. orientalis | M | 2.90 × 10−6 | 1.10 × 10−10 | 4.80 × 10−9 | 1.90 × 10−5 | 2.10 × 10−7 |
| FM | 3.40 × 10−6 | 1.30 × 10−10 | 1.50 × 10−8 | 1.90 × 10−5 | 2.50 × 10−7 | |
| C. microphylla | M | 5.90 × 10−6 | 1.10 × 10−10 | 4.80 × 10−9 | 2.20 × 10−5 | 1.30 × 10−7 |
| FM | 6.90 × 10−6 | 1.30 × 10−10 | 1.50 × 10−8 | 3.40 × 10−5 | 1.50 × 10−7 |
M, male; FM, female.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Reference
- 1.Şeker M.E., Erdoğan A., Ay E. Comparative Analysis of Phenolic, Carotenoid, and Elemental Profiles in Three Crataegus Species from Şebinkarahisar, Türkiye: Implications for Nutritional Value and Safety. Molecules. 2025;30:2934. doi: 10.3390/molecules30142934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]