Corrigendum to “Surface reactivity of Etna volcanic ash and evaluation of health risks” [Sci. Total Environ. 761 (2021), 143248]

During the reply to a letter to the Editor by Carol Stewart, David E Damby, Ines Tomašek and Claire J Horwell “Experimental design and data relevance in a volcanic ash-leachate health study” we have detected some errors in the data transcription of Table 2 and the connected figures. We acknowledge them for this. The purpose of this note is amend these errors with our apologies. Keywords: The last keyword “risk assessment” might be substituted by “risk evaluation” Table 2 might be substituted by the one we provide here: [Table presented] Table 2 new caption: Concentration of dissolved elements released during leaching experiment expressed as mg/kgt, all elements measured with ICP-MS except the ones marked with *, measured with ICP-OES. In italic are reported the RLM of the elements for which is known the concentration of tephras emitted during the 2012 and 2013 eruptions (Behncke et al., 2014; Bonaccorso et al., 2014). A series of leaching experiments were conducted on a basis of 30′, 60′, and 90′ and the results here provided correspond to the 30′ run, since with extending time several phenomena o element precipitation has been detected. Figs. 3 and 4 might be also replaced by the ones below, without changing the original captions. New Fig. 3: [Figure presented] New Fig. 4: [Figure presented] The last phrase of the first paragraph in the second column of p 6: “Results are comparable for Be, Zr, Tl, Se, Ni, Rb, Ba, Sr, K, Al, Na and Ca, whereas the other elements contents are lower when compared to literature data; in some cases (P, Fe and Cl) the difference is of four orders of magnitude (Fig. 3).” Might be substituted by: “Results are comparable for most elements, i.e. for Be, Zr, Tl, Se, Ni, Rb, Ba, Sr, K, Al, Na and Ca, whereas the other elements contents are lower when compared to literature data; in some cases the difference is of four (Cl), three (P) of two (Fe) orders of magnitude (Fig. 3). We must keep in mind that the leachate reflects not just the volume of gases involved in each single eruption, but also the main geochemistry of the magma and, in some cases (i.e. As, Hg, Pb, etc.) can also to provide idea of the geochemical singularity of the partially assimilated host rock of a magmatic chamber. Therefore, the most consistent comparison might be made with other eruptions of analogous magma chemistry and in an ideal case, of the same volcano. When we reduce the data to the same significant units (i.e. μg/l in leachate) our results are consistent and in the same range of content that the Etna's ash ones by D'Addabbo et al. (2015), excluding B (our values much lesser that one's of D'Addabbo et al., 2015), and P. Our Mn results are a little be minor that the D'Addabbo et al. (2015), but in the same range, differences are possible related to variation of magma and gases content along the recent eruptive activity of the volcano. By opposite, major soluble elements reported by Cangemi et al. (2017) result to be an order of magnitude higher to our data and the ones by D'Addabbo et al. (2015), while their reported trace or minor elements are in the same order of magnitude, o somewhat lesser. Since the element's data set of these authors is reduced respect to the ones in this paper, it is difficult to undertake further conclusions by comparing data. But, on other hand, our results are very consistent with the ones obtained on recent volcanic activity in basaltic volcanoes, i.e. when compared with 2011 Grímsvötn eruption in Iceland (Cabré et al., 2016), the Copahue, Lonquimay and Llaima (Ruggieri et al., 2011) in the Southern Andes.”