Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54001-3, published online 21 February 2024

The original version of this Article contained a repeated error, where all instances of the unit ‘µm’ were incorrectly given as ‘mm’.

As a result, in the Material and methodology section, under the subheading ‘Quantification of the coccolith‑Sr/Ca ratios’,

“The laboratory procedure is further described in the Supplementary Material. We present the Sr/Ca ratios determined from the bulk fraction (< 20 mm) and from the three coccolith size-fractions (> 6 mm, 3–6 mm and < 3 mm), which we compared to published data concerning the total and species-specific coccolith- and coccolith-CaCO3 export production from the same samples.”

now reads:

“The laboratory procedure is further described in the Supplementary Material. We present the Sr/Ca ratios determined from the bulk fraction (< 20 µm) and from the three coccolith size-fractions (> 6 µm, 3–6 µm and < 3 µm), which we compared to published data concerning the total and species-specific coccolith- and coccolith-CaCO3 export production from the same samples.”

Additionally, in the Results, under the subheading, ‘Coccolith CaCO3 size fraction separation for Sr/Ca analyses’,

“The bulk fraction (< 20 mm) overall mimicked the seasonal variation of the original coccolith sinking assemblages and related coccolith-CaCO3 reported by8,17. The small fraction (< 3 mm) was dominated (38–87%) by CaCO3 from deep-dwelling species Gladiolithus flabellatus and F. profunda. The intermediate (~ 3–6 mm) and large fractions (> 6 mm) were dominated by carbonate produced by Helicosphaera spp. (up to 83%) followed by Scyphosphaera apsteinii (up to 44%), Calcidiscus leptoporus (up to 19%) and Pontosphaera spp. (up to 7%).”

now reads:

“The bulk fraction (< 20 µm) overall mimicked the seasonal variation of the original coccolith sinking assemblages and related coccolith-CaCO3 reported by8,17. The small fraction (< 3 µm) was dominated (38–87%) by CaCO3 from deep-dwelling species Gladiolithus flabellatus and F. profunda. The intermediate (~ 3–6 µm) and large fractions (> 6 µm) were dominated by carbonate produced by Helicosphaera spp. (up to 83%) followed by Scyphosphaera apsteinii (up to 44%), Calcidiscus leptoporus (up to 19%) and Pontosphaera spp. (up to 7%).”

, And under the subheading ‘Seasonal distribution of the Sr/Ca ratios’.

“We found generally higher ranges of Sr/Ca in the large fraction (> 6 mm; 1.6–12.6), followed by the bulk (< 20 mm; 1.2–5.4) and intermediate-size fractions (3–6 mm; 0.7–5.7), and finally the small size fraction (< 3 mm) with the lowest range (1–2.5).”

now reads:

“We found generally higher ranges of Sr/Ca in the large fraction (> 6 µm; 1.6–12.6), followed by the bulk (< 20 µm; 1.2–5.4) and intermediate-size fractions (3–6 µm; 0.7–5.7), and finally the small size fraction (< 3 µm) with the lowest range (1–2.5).”

Furthermore, in the legend of Fig. 2,

“Species-specific coccolith-CaCO3 contribution (%) in the bulk fraction (< 20 μm) and coccolith size fractions (small < 3 mm; intermediate 3–6 mm; and large > 6 mm), from selected sediment trap M4 samples U2, U7, U12, U14, U18, U21 and U24.”

now reads:

“Species-specific coccolith-CaCO3 contribution (%) in the bulk fraction (< 20 μm) and coccolith size fractions (small < 3 μm; intermediate 3–6 μm; and large > 6 μm), from selected sediment trap M4 samples U2, U7, U12, U14, U18, U21 and U24.”

In the legend of Fig. 3,

“(a) Seasonal variation of the coccolith-Sr/Ca ratios in the bulk fraction (< 20 μm) and in the coccolith size fractions (small < 3 mm; intermediate 3–6 mm; large > 6 mm); (b) total coccolith- and coccolith-CaCO3 fluxes8,17 from sediment trap M4.”

now reads:

“(a) Seasonal variation of the coccolith-Sr/Ca ratios in the bulk fraction (< 20 μm) and in the coccolith size fractions (small < 3 μm; intermediate 3–6 μm; large > 6 μm); (b) total coccolith- and coccolith-CaCO3 fluxes8,17 from sediment trap M4.”

And in the legend of Fig. 4,

“(a) Normalized coccolith-Sr/Ca ratios from the bulk fraction < 20 mm (light orange line) and coccolith size fractions (small, intermediate and large size fractions—red, blue and black lines, respectively);”

now reads:

“(a) Normalized coccolith-Sr/Ca ratios from the bulk fraction < 20 μm (light orange line) and coccolith size fractions (small, intermediate and large size fractions—red, blue and black lines, respectively);”

and,

“Numbers refer to samples U2, U7, U12, U14, U18, U21 and U24, in which we performed a taxonomic analysis of the bulk fraction (< 20 mm) and of the coccolith small, intermediate, and large size fraction (shown in Fig. 2).”

now reads:

“Numbers refer to samples U2, U7, U12, U14, U18, U21 and U24, in which we performed a taxonomic analysis of the bulk fraction (< 20 μm) and of the coccolith small, intermediate, and large size fraction (shown in Fig. 2).”

in the Discussions section, under the subheading ‘Coccolith size fractions and species‑specific Sr/Ca signal’,

“Our data clearly support this, based on the much higher Sr/Ca ratios measured in the large (> 6 mm) coccolith size fractions.”

now reads:

“Our data clearly support this, based on the much higher Sr/Ca ratios measured in the large (> 6 μm) coccolith size fractions.”

and,

“According to coccolith biometric data presented in17, coccoliths of S. apsteinii were by far the largest coccoliths measured in samples from trap M4 (mean length of 15.24 mm), resulting in a coccolith calcite mass of 1665.06 pg. (Table IV in the Supplementary Material).”

now reads:

“According to coccolith biometric data presented in17, coccoliths of S. apsteinii were by far the largest coccoliths measured in samples from trap M4 (mean length of 15.24 μm), resulting in a coccolith calcite mass of 1665.06 pg. (Table IV in the Supplementary Material).”

Finally, the header row of Table 1 has been corrected.

Coccolith Sr/Ca (m mol/mol)

 < 20 micron

 < 3 micron

3–6 micron

 > 6 micron

now reads:

Coccolith Sr/Ca (m mol/mol)

 < 20 μm

 < 3 μm

3–6 μm

 > 6 μm

The original version of this Article has been corrected.