Equation (19) was used to estimate the effective bulk densities for particle populations with different values of DJ. Although Eq. (19) in the original version of the paper was written erroneously, the effective density estimates were performed using the correct version of Eq. (19) so that these estimates are correct. Values of the coefficients CJ were computed by regressing logW versus logZ shown in Fig. 5 of Atlas et al. (1995), which represent the original data. The values of CJ in Table 2 were inadvertently increased by a constant factor. This fact did not cause errors in estimating effective bulk densities, because the ratio CJ/C1 was used for these estimates. It should be mentioned, though, that some uncertainty in density estimates exists because of truncation of the CJ values to two digits after the decimal point.
In essence, both our method and that of Brown and Francis (1995) of estimating bulk densities involve approximations and both lead to the inverse relationship of density to diameter. This relationship, in turn, results in the increase of Z with median volume diameter (for D0 > 100 μm) by about two rather than three orders of magnitude at constant ice water content.
Acknowledgments
We are indebted to Dr. Z. Wang of the Department of Meteorology, University of Utah, for the inquiry that led to the discovery of these errors.
REFERENCES
Atlas, D., S. Matrosov, A. J. Heymsfield, M.-D. Chou, and D. B. Wolff, 1995: Radar and radiation properties of ice clouds. J. Appl. Meteor.,34, 2329–2345.
Brown, P. R. A., and P. N. Francis, 1995: Improved measurements of the ice water content in cirrus using a total water probe. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol.,12, 410–414.
