Correction to “Recovery and Degradation Drive Changes in the Dispersal Capacity of Stream Macroinvertebrate Communities”

Cano-Barbacil, C., J. S. Sinclair, E. A. Welti, and P. Haase. 2025. “Recovery and Degradation Drive Changes in the Dispersal Capacity of Stream Macroinvertebrate Communities.” Global Change Biology 31: e70054. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70054.

In the original published version of the article, the interpretation of Lancaster, Downes, and Kayll (2024) results was not clearly formulated and requires clarification. The original text stated:

“For example, larger-bodied taxa and flying insects with bigger wings disperse greater distances than smaller-bodied and smaller-winged taxa (see Lancaster, Downes, and Kayll 2024), generally showing greater colonization capacity as females are likely to oviposit farther from their source population (Graham, Storey, and Smith 2017; Jenkins et al. 2007).”

However, Lancaster et al. (2024) reported that among-species variation in body or wing size does not reliably predict dispersal distance: “Across 59 species in 12 families, wing morphology was not associated with actual dispersal. Within some families, individual wing metrics captured some dispersal differences among species, although useful metrics varied among families and predictive power was typically low.”

The sentence should therefore be revised to more accurately reflect the contrasting findings in the literature while acknowledging the contribution of Lancaster, Downes, and Kayll (2024). The corrected version is as follows:

“For example, it is commonly suggested that larger-bodied taxa and flying insects with bigger wings often disperse greater distances than smaller-bodied and smaller-winged taxa, generally showing greater colonization capacity as females are likely to oviposit farther from their source population (Graham, Storey, and Smith 2017; Jenkins et al. 2007; but see Lancaster, Downes, and Kayll 2024).”

This corrected version acknowledges the contrasting findings of Lancaster et al. (2024) while reflecting evidence from other studies. Jenkins et al. (2007) showed that: “Overall, size matters: larger active dispersers attained greater maximum observed dispersal distances than smaller active dispersers.” Similarly, Graham et al. (2017) discuss that: “Some studies have linked differences in dispersal capability of mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies to morphological traits, including large body mass, wing size, and ratio of body mass to wing area (Malmqvist 2000; Hoffsten 2004; Parkyn and Smith 2011), but one, using Central European limnephilid caddisflies, found no advantage for dispersal in either morphologic parameters (i.e., wing length, size, or aspect ratio) or aerodynamic indices (Müller-Peddinghaus and Hering 2013).” Notably, additional studies not previously cited showed that insect wingspan is often a key trait influencing dispersal ability. For example, Sekar (2012) showed that “wingspan was the most important determinant of dispersal ability” in butterflies, while McCulloch et al. (2017) showed “a strong relationship between species wing length and area of occupancy” and a significant positive correlation “between geographical range and relative wing length” in 100 stonefly taxa.

Our correction does not change the findings of the paper, and we sincerely apologize for misrepresenting the findings of Lancaster, Downes, and Kayll (2024).