Correction: Koutsouris et al. Utilization of Global Precipitation Datasets in Data Limited Regions: A Case Study of Kilombero Valley, Tanzania. Atmosphere, 2017, 8, 246

The authors would like to correct the published article [1], following the detection of editorial mistakes by the main author, as explained below.

Table 3. Performance scores for MC discharge simulations. Performance is shown as R_eff,log, R², V_e, and RMSE values for each bias correction technique considered.

Mpanga Catchment
GDP			Reff,log	R2	Ve	RMSE			Reff,log	R2	Ve	RMSE
CFSR	Non-	bias corrected	0.33	0.23	0.96	0.28	ModB	bias corrected	0.43	0.40	1.00	0.26
ERAi			0.53	0.48	0.96	0.23			0.53	0.50	0.96	0.23
MERRA			0.38	0.44	0.94	0.29			0.61	0.58	0.99	0.22
CMORPH			0.41	0.32	0.95	0.27			0.41	0.33	0.95	0.27
TRMMv7			0.45	0.36	1.00	0.27			0.51	0.42	0.99	0.24
Ensemble			0.55	0.49	0.97	0.23			0.56	0.53	0.99	0.23
Rain gauge			0.12	0.14	0.94	0.36			0.47	0.34	0.97	0.25
CRU *			0.27	0.17	0.98	0.30			0.30	0.20	0.96	0.29
GPCC *			0.29	0.23	0.99	0.30			0.32	0.24	0.97	0.29
UDEL *			0.35	0.25	0.99	0.28			0.45	0.37	0.99	0.25
CFSR	QM	bias corrected	0.22	0.18	0.96	0.33	QM + ModB	bias corrected	0.53	0.40	0.98	0.23
ERAi			0.18	0.16	0.91	0.35			0.54	0.41	0.98	0.23
MERRA			0.05	0.08	1.00	0.33			0.52	0.45	0.98	0.23
CMORPH			0.35	0.22	1.00	0.28			0.51	0.40	0.98	0.23
TRMMv7			0.19	0.15	0.91	0.35			0.51	0.42	0.98	0.24
Ensemble			0.19	0.16	0.91	0.35			0.50	0.36	0.98	0.24
GPCC *	DP	bias corrected	0.34	0.19	0.99	0.29	DP + ModB	bias corrected	0.37	0.23	0.97	0.28
CRU *			0.36	0.24	0.97	0.28			0.38	0.27	0.95	0.28
UDEL *			0.46	0.32	0.96	0.27			0.52	0.44	1.00	0.24

* Monthly products.

has been replaced with a new Table to show the streamflow simulation results for Mpanga Catchment. A missing table has been inserted as

Table 5. Performance scores for KC discharge simulations. Performance is shown as R_eff,log, R², Volume Error (Vol. Err.), and RMSE values for each bias correction technique considered.

Kiburubutu Catchment
GDP			Reff,log	R2	Vol. Err.	RMSE			Reff,log	R2	Vol. Err.	RMSE
CFSR	Non-	bias corrected	0.38	0.01	0.78	0.26	ModB	bias corrected	0.41	0.01	0.74	0.25
ERAi			0.63	0.26	0.78	0.18			0.66	0.24	0.73	0.18
MERRA			0.47	0.25	0.86	0.20			0.68	0.24	0.72	0.18
CMORPH			0.56	0.08	0.79	0.23			0.62	0.10	0.68	0.20
TRMMv7			0.55	0.07	0.87	0.23			0.59	0.11	0.70	0.20
Ensemble			0.63	0.19	0.80	0.19			0.67	0.22	0.73	0.19
Rain gauge			0.52	0.25	0.96	0.23			0.59	0.21	0.78	0.20
CRU *			0.42	0.09	0.97	0.29			0.57	0.12	0.70	0.21
GPCC *			0.38	0.14	0.79	0.24			0.59	0.14	0.69	0.21
UDEL *			0.47	0.12	0.86	0.23			0.64	0.16	0.71	0.19
CFSR	QM	bias corrected	0.41	0.07	0.92	0.27	QM + ModB	bias corrected	0.53	0.12	0.71	0.20
ERAi			0.49	0.14	0.91	0.27			0.59	0.20	0.79	0.20
MERRA			0.40	0.07	0.96	0.29			0.53	0.12	0.75	0.21
CMORPH			0.44	0.05	0.92	0.27			0.51	0.08	0.74	0.22
TRMMv7			0.45	0.04	0.98	0.29			0.52	0.04	0.77	0.23
Ensemble			0.48	0.07	0.91	0.29			0.56	0.06	0.83	0.23
GPCC *	DP	bias corrected	0.51	0.20	0.96	0.24	DP + ModB	bias corrected	0.59	0.12	0.82	0.22
CRU *			0.51	0.13	0.99	0.26			0.57	0.18	0.83	0.21
UDEL *			0.56	0.24	0.99	0.23			0.63	0.23	0.82	0.19

* Monthly products.

, showing the streamflow simulation results for Kiburubutu Catchment. The table previously labeled and referenced as Table 5 should now be considered as

Table 6. Performance scores for KC discharge simulations. Performance is shown as R_eff,log values for each bias correction technique considered.

. All sentences that were referenced to Table 5 refer to the new Table 5, except for the sentence “Simulations based on QM bias corrected GPD products performances were in general worse compared to their non-bias corrected counterparts (Table 5)”, which refers to Table 6. Table 3, Table 5, and Table 6 should read:

The authors apologize for any inconvenience this has caused to the readers. The changes do not affect the scientific results of this paper. The manuscript will be updated, and the original version will remain online on the article webpage, with a reference to this Correction.