Corrigendum to “Early precipitated micropyrite in microbialites: A capsule of microbial sulfur cycling” by Marin-Carbonne et al., 2022
Affiliations | Corresponding Author | Cite as- Share this article
-
Article views:234Cumulative count of HTML views and PDF downloads.
- Download Citation
- Rights & Permissions
top
Corrigendum
Correction to: Geochemical Perspectives Letters 21, 7–12, doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.2209, published 21 March 2022.
Correction to the Quasi Simultaneous Arrival effect
After reviewing our work based on the suggestion of a careful reader, we have identified a miscalculation in the correction of the Quasi-Simultaneous Arrival (QSA) effect. This error affected the results presented in the article and was propagated to both the standard and sample data. The error has caused a slight change in the instrumental mass fractionation determination, resulting in a 2 ‰ shift in the corrected data. However, this correction remains negligible as corrected values remain within the error bars of each data. The average Δpyr values for Lake Atexcac and Cayo Coco Lagoon are 61.4 ± 18.3 ‰ and 59.1 ± 29.6 ‰ respectively, which is consistent with the equilibrium sulfate-sulfide fractionation observed in natural settings with low microbial sulfate reduction respiration rates. However, the data distribution has slightly changed, as shown in the corrected Figure 4. We have thoroughly reviewed the revised data and found that the conclusion drawn from the corrected results is consistent with the original article.
Corrections have been made to the “Microbialitic Micropyrite Preserve Primary Isotopic Microbial Fractionation Signatures” section in the main text and to Figure 4, also the Sulfur Isotope Analyses by NanoSIMS section in the Supplementary Information (methods) and Tables S-4 and S-5. The corrected Figure 4 and text are shown below. The corrected Supplementary Information is also available for download at the online version of the original article.
Microbialitic Micropyrite Preserve Primary Isotopic Microbial Fractionation Signatures. In the first paragraph on page 11, the following sentence is now corrected to:
“Considering these hugely contrasting isotopic compositions of sulfate, micropyrites display surprisingly similar Δpyr values (i.e. Δpyr = δ34SSO4 − δ34Spyr) of 61.4 ± 18.3 ‰ and 59.1 ± 29.6 ‰ for Atexcac and Cayo Coco, respectively (Fig. 4).”
Sulfur Isotope Analyses by NanoSIMS (Methods) in the Supplementary Information. In the second paragraph the QSA correcting factor has been corrected:
“Using different aperture slits to produce variations of the secondary ion signal over primary current ratio on the standard, we determined a QSA correcting factor of 0.523 and 0.586 for 34S/32S ratio for each session consistent with the value of 0.69 previously published (Slodzian et al., 2004; Bontognali et al., 2012; Marin-Carbonne et al., 2018).
The caption to Table S-4 and columns describing 34S/32S measured, 1σ and the IMF have been corrected, as shown below:
Table S-4 Measured 34/32S ratios and δ34S values corrected from QSA effect in two different sessions for the Maine and UCLA pyrite standards. Instrumental mass fractionation was 1.0044 in the first session and 1.0140 in the second.
Standards | δ34S true (‰) | 34S/32S true | 34S/32S measured | 1σ | IMF |
Session MNHN | |||||
UCLA | 1.5 | 0.04423001 | 0.044448 | 7.37.10−5 | 1.0044 |
MAINE | −20.1 | 0.04327607 | 0.043424 | 7.18.10−6 | |
Session EPFL | |||||
UCLA | 1.5 | 0.04423001 | 0.04442 | 1.04.10−4 | 1.0140 |
MAINE | −20.1 | 0.04327607 | 0.44304 | 5.71.10−5 |
Table S-5 reporting Sulfur isotope compositions of framboidal and micropyrites has also been corrected and is available for download at the online version of this article. Download Table S-5 (xlsx)