In the original version of this article, there is an error in the Early Event in Competition Studies section on page 598. The correct text is given below.

An intuitive approach to explain this is by the different diffusion coefficients of PS80 (1.8 × 10− 6 cm2/s for the monomer, 1.8 × 10− 7 cm2/s for the micelle)1 and IgG1 (~ 4 × 10− 7 cm2/s).2., 3. The diffusion coefficient of the mAb and the PS80 monomer (the competing species), differ by only a factor ~ 4. Hence, there could be a limited degree of competition for the surface in the initial phase, where a fraction of the mAb would adsorb and be resistant to PS80, while another but smaller fraction initially adsorbs and is then removed by the surfactant due to insufficient contact points. However, the time scale of the event (in terms of height and width of the spike) remained constant regardless of surfactant concentrations being below or above CMC (Supplementary Figure 5), which would argue against this explanation. This same observation negates a potential transient PS80 depletion from the bulk in the early adsorption phase as a result of adsorption to tubing, since also in that case the height and width should be reduced upon increasing PS80 concentration.