Correction to: Nature Microbiology https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-023-01432-9. Published online 31 July 2023.

In the version of this article initially published, there was a mistake in Fig. 2f where 13C-diacetyl was plotted instead of 13C-enriched diacetyl (13C/12C + 13C). This error led to the erroneous conclusion that there was 13C-enriched diacetyl emitted from chambers that received 13C1-pyruvate. The corrected version replaces Fig. 2i with 13C-enriched diacetyl continuous flux data. Furthermore, since there was no 13C-enriched diacetyl emitted from chambers that received 13C1-pyruvate, Fig. 2, panel i (as well as panel h), was corrected to show only cumulative 13C-fluxes from chambers that received 13C2-pyruvate where there were 13C-eniched fluxes. Fig. 3, panel a, was corrected to leave only a pink circle under “Diacetyl” indicating 13C-enrichment from only chambers that received 13C2-pyruvate. Original and corrected Fig. 2f–i and 3a panels are shown as, respectively, Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 below. Finally, in the Results section, the associated text that refers to Fig. 2 in reference to compounds that were 13C-enriched from chambers receiving 13C1-pyruvate was changed from “Acetic acid and C4H6O2 also showed 13C-enriched continuous efflux (Fig. 2e,f) from chambers that received 13C1-pyruvate, with cumulative effluxes that increased significantly by factors of 1.9 and 3.5, respectively, during drought (t-values = 3.45 and 2.76, respectively; d.f. = 7, P < 0.05; LME) (Fig. 2g)” to the following in order to remove mention of diacetyl (C4H6O2): “Acetic acid also showed 13C-enriched continuous efflux (Fig. 2e,f) from chambers that received 13C1-pyruvate where 13C-acetic acid cumulative efflux increased significantly by a factor of 1.9 during drought (t-value = 3.45; DF = 7; P < 0.05; LME) (Fig. 2g)”. The changes have been made in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Original and corrected Fig. 2f–i.

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Original and corrected Fig. 3a.

Full size image