Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33136-0, published online 08 October 2018


The original version of this Article contained an error in Figure 4, where the years 2016 and 2017 have been reversed. In addition, data in the label for the first category was incorrect:


“> 0–40”.


now reads:


“≤ 40”.


The original Figure 4 and accompanying legend appear below.

Figure 4
figure 4

Notified LB incidence by district of residence (n = 56,011). Based on equal distance between lowest and highest recorded incidence, we formed 5 incidence categories. 435 cases with tick exposure in a foreign country were excluded. Among the remaining 33,153 cases with information on place of tick exposure in Germany, district of exposure corresponded with district of residence in 90.6%, 4.9% reported exposure in another district in the same state and 4.5% in another state in Germany.


The original Article has been corrected.