Correction to: Nature Communications https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11595-x, published online 9 August 2019.

The original version of this Article contained an error in last sentence of the legend to Table 4, which incorrectly read ‘aAssuming a tangential velocity of 150–300 km−1 from the proper motions of ref. 22’ The correct version states ‘150–300 km s−1’ in place of ‘150–300 km−1’.

The original version also contained errors in Table 5, in which the headings of the fifth, sixth and seventh rows incorrectly read, ‘\(\dot M_{_{{\mathrm{ionised}}}}\) (×10−6M y−1)’, ‘\(\dot M_{{\mathrm{ejec}}}\) (×10−5M y−1)’ and ‘\(\dot P_{_{{\mathrm{ionised}}}}\) (×10−4M y−1 km−1)’, instead of the correct ‘\(\dot M_{_{{\mathrm{ionised}}}}\) (×10−6M yr−1)’, ‘\(\dot M_{{\mathrm{ejec}}}\) (×10−5M yr−1)’ and ‘\(\dot P_{_{{\mathrm{ionised}}}}\) (×10−4M yr−1 km s−1)’, respectively.

The last sentence of the legend to Table 5 originally incorrectly read ‘aAssuming a tangential velocity of 150–300 km−1 from the proper motions of ref. 22’ The correct version states ‘150–300 km s−1’ in place of ‘150–300 km−1’.

The original version also contained an error in the third sentence of the first paragraph of the ‘Ionised mass-loss rate on source’ section of the Methods, which incorrectly read ‘From our observations we obtain the following parameters for core B: S5.8 = 0.794 ± 0.03 mJy, ν = 5.8 GHz, vj = 600 ± 100 km−1, θ0 = 52.3° ± 4.4°, D = 2.2 kpc, T = 10,000 K, the resulting ionised mass-loss rate is 1.81 ± 0.33 × 10−6 M yr−1, consistent with ref. 22.’ The correct version states ‘vj = 600 ± 100 km s−1’ in place of ‘vj = 600 ± 100 km−1’.

This has been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.