In the published article, there was an error in Figure 5 as published. An error was made when calculating pollen accumulation rate (PAR). The R package “rbacon” was used to create the age–depth model and extract the sediment accumulation rate or deposition time. By default, the argument “cmyr” is set to FALSE and sediment accumulation rates are calculated in years per cm. To obtain the sediment accumulation rate, the cmyr argument must be set to TRUE. Due to the wording in the manual, we thought that the sediment accumulation rate was extracted, but deposition time was extracted. In the paper, we used the incorrect formula to calculate PAR given that we extracted the deposition time and not the sediment accumulation rate. In the correction, we used . The corrected Figure 5 and its caption appear below.
Figure 5
In the published article, there was an error in Figure 6 as published. Several pollen concentration values were incorrect due to the volume not being standardized to 1 cm3. An error was also made when calculating pollen accumulation rate (PAR). The R package “rbacon” was used to create the age–depth model and extract the sediment accumulation rate or deposition time. By default, the argument “cmyr” is set to FALSE and sediment accumulation rates are calculated in years per cm. To obtain the sediment accumulation rate, the cmyr argument must be set to TRUE. Due to the wording in the manual, we thought that the sediment accumulation rate was extracted, but deposition time was extracted. In the paper, we used the incorrect formula to calculate PAR given that we extracted the deposition time and not the sediment accumulation rate. In the correction, we used . The corrected Figure 6 and its caption appear below.
Figure 6
A correction has been made to Discussion, Influence of vegetation on the fire regime, paragraph 3. This sentence previously stated:
“The fire-facilitated Picea was also likely in low density stands for much of zone 2, as the average pollen influx of ~1,750 grains/cm2/year was lower than the average Picea influx of pollen zone 4b where a closed canopy was likely present (~3,100 grains/cm2/year) (Figure 6b).”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“The fire-facilitated Picea was also likely in low density stands for much of zone 2, as the average pollen influx of ~1,900 grains/cm2/year was lower than the average Picea influx of pollen zone 4b where a closed canopy was likely present (~4,800 grains/cm2/year) (Figure 6b)”.
A correction has been made to the Acknowledgments. This sentence previously stated:
“We would like to thank K. Costanza, D. Łucówand J.M. St-Jacques for constructive comments used to improve the manuscript. We would also like to thank R. Skinner and K. Gaudet for their aid in the field and lab. The contents of this manuscript build upon the thesis of NL.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“AA as the principal investigator received a Parks Canada Research and Collection Permit to sample within Terra Nova National Park (Permit Number: TNP-2017-25138). We would like to thank K. Costanza, D. Łucówand J.M. St-Jacques for constructive comments used to improve the manuscript. We would also like to thank R. Skinner and K. Gaudet for their aid in the field and lab. The contents of this manuscript build upon the thesis of NL.”
The original article has been updated.
Statements
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.
Summary
Keywords
fire return interval, Holocene, pollen analysis, charcoal analysis, Terra Nova National Park, fire frequency, climate, Newfoundland
Citation
Lake NF, Arsenault A and Cwynar LC (2025) Correction: A Holocene fire history from Terra Nova National Park, Newfoundland, Canada: vegetation and climate change both influenced the fire regime. Front. Ecol. Evol. 13:1651111. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2025.1651111
Received
20 June 2025
Accepted
11 July 2025
Published
28 July 2025
Volume
13 - 2025
Edited and reviewed by
Gael Le Roux, UMR5245 Laboratoire Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Environnement (ECOLAB), France
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Lake, Arsenault and Cwynar.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Nickolas F. Lake, Nickolas.lake@unb.ca
Disclaimer
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.