Erratum for: A&A 518, A7 (2010), DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014301

In the published version of Dasi-Espuig et al. (2010), Fig. 4a shows the relationship between the cycle averaged tilt angle normalised by the mean latitude,  ⟨ α ⟩/⟨ λ ⟩ , based on the Mount Wilson (MW) data, and the strength, S, of the same cycle. This figure is incorrect since the values of the cycle average tilt angles used,  ⟨ α ⟩ , were based on the Kodaikanal (KK) data, while the cycle average latitudes,  ⟨ λ ⟩ , were based on the MW data. This error also affected the correlation coefficients between the cycle area-weighted tilt angles normalised by the mean latitude,  ⟨ α_ω ⟩/⟨ λ ⟩ , and the S of the same cycle.

Here we present the correct plot in Fig. 1 using the MW data for both the cycle average tilt angles and latitudes. Figure 1 is now in agreement with the results of Ivanov (2012), and of McClintock & Norton (2013) who also employed the MW data in a similar analysis. The corresponding correlation coefficients are listed in Table 1 together with the probability that these are due to chance. Also listed are the correlation coefficients of the relationships using  ⟨ α_ω ⟩/⟨ λ ⟩ .

We want to stress that this error only affected the relationships of the normalised cycle average and cycle area-weighted average tilt angles based on the MW data, with the S of the same cycle. Therefore, all of the results based on the KK data, and the results based on the MW data of the relationships with the S of the next cycle remain unchanged. Since the correlation coefficient of the corrected anticorrelation between  ⟨ α ⟩/⟨ λ ⟩  and the S of the same cycle is weaker than in the published version, point (3) in Sect. 5 should say “A negative correlation between the normalised tilt angle, or  ⟨ α ⟩/⟨ λ ⟩ , and the strength of the same cycle is found (r_c = −0.79 and r_c = −0.93 for MW and KK, respectively)”. The rest of the conclusions remain unchanged.

Fig. 1 Corrected Fig. 4a of Dasi-Espuig et al. (2010). Cycle averaged tilt angle normalised by the mean latitude vs. the strength of the same cycle based on MW data (rc = −0.79). The error bars represent 1σ error and the dashed line a linear fit to the points. Cycles 15 and 21 are shown as squares with dashed lines for the error bars because of their incompleteness.

References

© ESO, 2013

All Tables

All Figures

	Fig. 1 Corrected Fig. 4a of Dasi-Espuig et al. (2010). Cycle averaged tilt angle normalised by the mean latitude vs. the strength of the same cycle based on MW data (rc = −0.79). The error bars represent 1σ error and the dashed line a linear fit to the points. Cycles 15 and 21 are shown as squares with dashed lines for the error bars because of their incompleteness.
In the text