In the published article, there was a mistake in a reference made in the Discussion. The statement “We also found that above a darkness score of 0.5, there was much less variability in the percentage of ASVs captured, with most swabs capturing upwards of 70% of the highly prevalent ruminal ASVs in the bacterial community, confirming our previous report (Edwards et al., 2023).” was incorrectly referenced.
The correct reference for the statement is “We also found that above a darkness score of 0.5, there was much less variability in the percentage of ASVs captured, with most swabs capturing upwards of 70% of the highly prevalent ruminal ASVs in the bacterial community, confirming our previous report (Young et al., 2020).”
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.