An error was introduced in the final editing stages of production of this paper in Mineralogical Magazine, 82(6), 1277–1300 under the headings Discussion, subheading: ASM and RGM compositional variations, p 1296; the word “should” was replaced mistakenly by “shouldn’t”

The correct text is:

“All these data together with Fe-rich RGM from the Velence Hills suggest that the incorporation of Fe2+ and Fe3+ in the RGM is possibly via above-mentioned substitution mechanisms but does not produce a valid end-member and should be included in formula calculation.”

You do not currently have access to this article.