Author Correction: Appropriate sampling methods and statistics can tell apart fraud from pesticide drift in organic farming

Correction to: Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93624-8, published online 20 July 2021

The original version of this Article contained errors.

A previous rendition of Figure 6 was published. The original Figure 6 and accompanying legend appear below.

Figure 6.

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) biplot of 67 farm samples for four variables used for the discriminant analysis (3maxcen, 2subrat2, 6sumrat2, 4maxrat3). The samples are coloured by the initial classification. The “drift” farms are clustered around (0, 0) while “application” farms are spread on left of the plot, and the “unclear” cases are distributed throughout.

In Supplementary Information 5, in the legend of Table 3,

“Comparability of the datasets from two laboratories used in Figure 1c for pesticide residues: (mostly) before release to the organic market (Eurofins) and on the (retail and wholesale) organic market (CVUA).”

now reads:

“Comparability of the datasets from two laboratories used in Figure 1d for pesticide residues: (mostly) before release to the organic market (Eurofins) and on the (retail and wholesale) organic market (CVUA).”

The original Supplementary Information 5 file is provided below.

The original Article and accompanying Supplementary Information file have been corrected.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-021-97273-9.