Corrigendum to “The container drayage problem for electric trucks with charging resource constraints” [Transp. Res. Part C 174 (2025) 105100] (Transportation Research Part C (2025) 174, (S0968090X25001044), (10.1016/j.trc.2025.105100))

The authors regret 1. **Table 4 (Small-scale Case Comparison):** The superscript ‘*’ was used to denote optimal solutions. However, this formatting led to misalignment of cost values in the vertical columns during typesetting. We request that the indication of optimal solutions be changed to bold formatting, consistent with subsequent tables, with the note: “Bold indicates the optimal solution is obtained.” 2. **Appendix Table A.1 (Parameter Descriptions):** The upper limit parameters for both task and station removal were incorrectly labelled as “lower limit.” These should be corrected to “upper limit.” 3. **Sections 5.3 and 5.4 (Abbreviation Formatting):** The abbreviation for total cost (TC) appears inconsistently in either italic or regular font. We request that it be standardized to italic font throughout. 4. **Figure 15(b) (Axis Titles):** The vertical axis titles need to be revised to “Charging times” (left) and “Battery swap times” (right). 5. **Figure 15(a) (Unit Correction):** The unit “Kg” in the main title on the right side should be corrected to the proper SI form “kg” (lowercase). 6. **Table 8 and Table B.6 (“Gap” Column):** The “Gap” column is missing its unit designation “(%)”. 7. **Table 4 (Subscript Formatting):** The subscripts ‘c’ and ‘t’ in “Gap_c” and “Gap_t” should be in regular font rather than italic. 8. **Table B.5 (Spacing in Unit):** There should be a space between “Gap” and its percentage unit in the last column, i.e., “Gap (%)” instead of “Gap(%)”. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.