Corrigendum

The article entitled “Reduced tillage, but not organic matter input, increased nematode diversity and food web stability in European long‐term field experiments” which was published in Molecular Ecology (volume 28, Issue 22, pages 4987–5005).

The authors of the above article (Bongiorno et al., 2019a) would like to note that the calculation of the decomposition measured by the tea bag method that was included in the article contained an error made by the first author. To calculate the tea bag decomposition, the final weight of the tea bag instead of the % mass loss (i.e. 1‐final weight/initial weight) was originally taken. Hence, the negative partial correlation originally found between tea bag decomposition and nematodes DNA copy number (i.e. qPCR counts), richness and diversity in group A should be positive. The error found in the final calculation of tea bag decomposition does not undermine the main messages and results of the article.

A corrected version of Table 4 is included here. In addition, in the text below, which can be found in the beginning of the result section 3.5, the originally incorrect text was changed with the correct version:

Table 4.

Partial correlation coefficients between total nematode qPCR counts, OTU richness, diversity, and evenness and chemical, physical and biological indicators for the samples belonging to group A (n = 132) and group B (n = 35)

	Group A				Group B
	qPCR counts	OTU richness (total OTUs number)	OTU diversity (expH)	OTU evenness (expH/OTU number)	qPCR counts		OTU richness (total OTUs number)	OTU diversity (expH)	OTU evenness (expH/OTU number)
Chemical parameters
TOC	0.31**	0.36***	0.14	−0.0002	0.12		0.003	0.15	0.14
pH	−0.02	0.06	−0.02	−0.04	0.37		0.06	−0.05	−0.07
TN	0.34***	0.34***	0.18*	0.04	0.02		−0.22	0.05	0.15
C/N	−0.35**	−−0.28*	−0.25*	−0.15	0.12		0.29	0.17	0.06
CEC	0.10	0.14	0.33***	0.30**	−0.14		−0.39*	0.19	0.37
Ca	−0.02	0.04	−0.09	−0.10	0.03		0.07	0.29	0.28
Mg	0.13	0.18*	0.24*	0.18*	−0.15		−0.27	0.04	0.15
K	0.21*	0.39***	0.25*	0.14	0.25		0.17	0.11	0.03
Na	−0.19*	−0.20*	−0.10	−0.04	−0.05		0.10	0.11	0.06
P	0.14	0.25*	0.08	−0.01	−0.10		0.21	0.15	0.07
Physical parameters
WSA	0.24*	0.30***	0.17*	0.06	0.10		−0.14	−0.24	−0.17
WHC	0.06	0.04	0.03	0.01	0.007		−0.03	0.10	0.11
BD	−0.38***	−0.38***	−0.17	−0.03	−0.20		−0.06	0.15	0.17
Sand	0.04	−0.009	−0.08	−0.08	−0.11		0.48*	0.28	0.07
Silt	0.07	0.10	−0.06	−0.11	0.27		0.23	0.02	−0.08
Clay	−0.05	−0.20*	−0.04	0.03	−0.51*		−0.37	0.19	0.36
Biological parameters
MBC	0.43***	0.41***	0.16	0.0007	−0.08		−0.23	−0.06	0.04
MBN	0.44***	0.21*	0.05	−0.04	−0.24		0.13	0.19	0.14
SR	0.45***	0.33***	0.24*	0.09	0.10		−0.05	−0.15	−0.12
qMic	0.22*	0.22*	0.09	0.009	0.009		−0.22	−0.15	−0.05
qCO2	−0.02	−0.02	0.13	0.19*	0.20*		0.21	−0.02	−0.11
Earthworm number	−0.10	−0.09	−0.17	−0.02	0.08		−0.16	−0.10	−0.03
Earthworm biomass	0.05	−0.04	−0.12	−0.05	0.09		−0.24	−0.16	−0.06
Tea bag decomposition	0.43**	0.36*	0.27*	0.15	0.17		−0.22	−0.03	0.05
Soil suppressiveness	0.37*	0.20	0.13	0.07	−0.16		0.09	0.0008	−0.04
Labile carbon fractions
Hy SUVA	−0.20*	0.06	0.07	0.05	−0.10		0.17	−0.11	−0.19
DOC SUVA	−0.26*	−0.06	0.07	0.10	0.009		−0.02	0.03	0.04
Hy−DOC	0.27*	0.14	−0.06	−0.13	0.08		−0.02	0.05	0.06
DOC	0.06	0.09	0.08	0.03	0.10		−0.13	−0.09	−0.03
HWEC	0.48***	0.35***	0.19*	0.05		0.06	−0.16	0.08	0.14
POXC	0.46***	0.36***	0.18*	0.04		0.17	0.003	0.10	0.09
POMC	0.49***	0.46***	0.12	−0.07		0.24	0.16	0.08	0.01

Abbreviations: TOC, Total organic carbon; TON, Total nitrogen; C/N, carbon to nitrogen ratio; CEC, Cation exchange capacity; WSA, water stable aggregates; WHC, water holding capacity; BD, bulk density; MBC, Microbial biomass carbon; MBN, microbial biomass nitrogen; qCO₂, metabolic quotient; qMic, microbial quotient; Hy, hydrophilic carbon; Hy, SUVA specific ultraviolet absorbance of hydrophylic carbon; DOC, dissolved organic carbon; DOC SUVA specific ultraviolet absorbance of dissolved organic carbon; POXC, permanganate oxidizable carbon; HWEC, hot water extractable carbon; POMC, particulate organic matter carbon.

^* p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .001, ***p ≤ .0001.

“In group A, qPCR counts were positively correlated with many chemical (TN, TOC, available K, Mg), physical (WSA) and biological (SR, MBC, MBN, qMic, soil suppressiveness, tea bag decomposition) parameters, and with four of the labile carbon fractions (Hy‐DOC, POXC, HWEC, and POMC). Negative correlations were found with the soil C to N ratio, BD, and Hy‐ and DOC SUVA (Table 4).”

This correction has been agreed by the authors. The authors apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused the journal's readers.