Corrections.

The November 2003 Forum article "New Data on Methylmercury and Fetuses" [Environ Health Perspect 111:A753 (2003)] incorrectly stated, in reference to methylmercury poisoning at Minamata Bay in the mid-1950s, "The hair mercury of pregnant women in Minamata ranged from 25 to 50 ppm." In fact, there are no direct data on the hair mercury concentrations of the pregnant Minamata women whose children had health problems associated with methylmercury poisoning. EHP regrets the error.

In Tables 3-7 of "Assessing Potential Risk of Heavy Metal Exposure from Consumption of Home-Produced Vegetables by Urban Populations" by Hough et al. [Environ Health Perspect 112:215-221 (2004)], the values "x 10" should be "x 100." In Table 3, the [beta.sub.1] values for lettuce should be-3.59 x [10.sup.-1] and the [beta.sub.1] value for cabbage should be -6.23 x [10.sup.-2].

A footnote was omitted from the body of Tables 2-4 in the article "Urinary Levels of Seven Phthalate Metabolites in the U.S. Population from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2000" by Silva et al. [Environ Health Perspect 112:331-338 (2004)]. Footnote "a," indicating the meaning of italics in each of these tables, should have been placed in the second line under "GM (geometric mean). EHP apologizes for the error. Also, Silva et al. would like to clarify that the "No. (%)" values in Tables 2-4 indicate sample size (percentage of detection).

Orlando et al. discovered an error in their article, "Endocrine-Disrupting Effects of Cattle Feedlot Effluent on an Aquatic Sentinel Species, the Fathead Minnow" [Environ Health Perspect 112:353-358 (2004)]. In Table 3, a zero was omitted from the value for gonadal mass under "Intermediate Site"; the correct value is 0.088 [+ or -] 0.01 instead of 0.88 [+ or -] 0.01.