Erratum: Geometric frustration and solid-solid transitions in model 2d tissue (Physical Review Letters (2018) 120 (268105) DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.268105)

Michael Moshe, Mark J. Bowick, M. Cristina Marchetti

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

1 Scopus citations


We correct two errors in the calculation of the effective elastic energy formally given in Eqs.(3)and (4) of our Letter, and whose derivation is given in the Supplemental Material (SM) [1]. We also show that these two errors effectively compensate each other, so that our results are qualitatively unchanged. First, while the expression given for the tensor APβin Eq.(3)is correct, the corresponding expression for the elastic tensor for the area energy is not. This should read) should control the pure area changes resulting from the isotropic compression or expansion of an isotropic solid. The second error is that an expansion of the exact continuum energy to quadratic order in the strain, given in Eq.(6) of the SM , is not sufficient to describe the long-wavelength limit of the cellular-tissue-vertex model. To obtain an effective long-wavelength elastic energy that captures the transition between compatible and incompatible solids one needs to incorporate higher order nonlinearities. As often happens in perturbative expansions of field theories, these higher order terms can be incorporated into an effective quadratic energy with renormalized coupling constants. This procedure yields corrections to the values offor detailed derivation of the model, and for a Mathematica code recovering the results presented in the Letter. (Formula Presented).

Original languageAmerican English
Article number179901
JournalPhysical Review Letters
Issue number17
StatePublished - 25 Oct 2019

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
©2019 American Physical Society.


Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum: Geometric frustration and solid-solid transitions in model 2d tissue (Physical Review Letters (2018) 120 (268105) DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.268105)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this