Arithmetic duality theorems for 1-motives (vol 578, pg 93, 2005)

The argument for proving Corollary 3.5 is insufficient; we fill in the gap here. Also, the first two statements of Proposition 4.1 may not be true in general in the case i = 1, but for the main results it suffices to use them over a sufficiently small U, where they hold. These results are used in the proof of Theorem 0.2, but its statement remains unchanged in the crucial case i = 1; in the (uninteresting) case i = 0 it needs to be modified slightly. We also correct a few other minor inaccuracies. square Our notation here follows that in [1]. All references to numbered theorems are to those in that paper.