Correction: Facial blushing and feather fluffing are indicators of emotions in domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus)

Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsLivestock and Poultry Management · Animal Nutrition and Physiology
The PLOS One Editors issue this correction notice to update the ethics statement of this article [1].
Following the publication of this article [1], PLOS investigated concerns pertaining to a perceived inconsistency between the ethics approval statement reported in the article stating that ethics approval is not required for a behavioral observation study, and the methodology section reporting a capture test that involved researchers physically interacting with the chickens, which could be considered experimental.
PLOS followed up with the authors, who provided a copy of the ethics approval document #CE19–2022–1310–1, the study protocol, and letters from both the Ethics Committee for Animal Experimentation of Val de Loire and the Animals used for Scientific Purpose Unit at the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research indicating that ethics approval was not required for the manual capture of chickens. During assessment of these documents, PLOS noted that the ethics approval document #CE19–2022–1310–1 and the study protocol were dated after the study reported in [1] was conducted. The authors confirmed that these documents relate to a follow-up study that included and expanded upon the methodology reported in [1]. PLOS received confirmation from the Ethics Committee for Animal Experimentation of Val de Loire (CEEA Vdl, CEEA—019) that ethical approval was not required for the study reported in [1] as the experiments were below the minimum threshold needed for a project to require formal ethical approval.
In light of the information received by PLOS, the ethics statement of this article [1] is updated to:
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
