文章基本信息

标题：Publisher Correction: Unveiling microbial preservation under hyperacidic and oxidizing conditions in the Oligocene Rio Tinto deposit
本地全文：下载
作者：David C. Fernández‑Remolar ; Daniel Carrizo ; Mourad Harir 等
期刊名称：Scientific Reports
电子版ISSN：2045-2322
出版年度：2021
卷号：11
DOI：10.1038/s41598-021-03255-2
语种：English
出版社：Springer Nature
摘要：Correction to: Scientific Reports 10.1038/s41598-021-00730-8, published online 02 November 2021 The original version of this Article contained errors. Firstly, citation numbers after reference 11 (with the exception of citations to References 7 and 10) were inaccurate by two. Additionally, in the Introduction, “Although different authors report neutral to alkaline conditions for underground Mars 7,8, the upper part of the planet interior has certainly been affected by the circulation and downwelling of low-pH and oxidizing solutions 8–10.” now reads: “Although different authors report neutral to alkaline conditions for underground Mars 7,8, the upper part of the planet interior has certainly been affected by the circulation and downwelling of low-pH and oxidizing solutions 9–11.” Furthermore, in the Materials and methods section, the subheading ‘Sample 010,109–1’ now reads ‘Sample 010109-1’, and “Thin sections of sample 010,109–1 were prepared for mineral and textural analysis under an optical microscope and a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) coupled with an Electron Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) probe, and molecular surface analysis by ToF-SIMS 105.” now reads: “Thin sections of sample 010109-1 were prepared for mineral and textural analysis under an optical microscope and a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) coupled with an Electron Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) probe, and molecular surface analysis by ToF-SIMS 107.” Finally, in the Materials and methods section, under the subheading ‘ToF–SIMS analysis’, exponents were incorrectly captured as citations, and “To prevent this problem, the thin sections of samples 010,109–1 and BH8-24c were cleaned by surface sputtering with a 100 nA 500 eV oxygen ion beam for 3 s.” now reads: “To prevent this problem, the thin sections of sample 010109–1 were cleaned by surface sputtering with a 100 nA 500 eV oxygen ion beam for 3 s.” The original Article has been corrected.