Corrigendum: Variation of photosynthetic induction in major horticultural crops is mostly driven by differences in stomatal traits

In the published article, there was an error in Table 2 as published. Stomatal size should have been calculated as π × stomatal length × stomatal width/4, therefore, all stomatal size values reported in this table (i.e. SS_ab and SS_ad) should have been divided by four. The corrected Table 2 and its caption “Definition, unit, maximum, minimum, mean and coefficient of variation (CV) for dynamic, steady-state, anatomical and physiological traits across 19 horticultural genotypes. Maximum and minimum values are average values of 6-9 replicates” appears below. Definition, unit, maximum, minimum, mean and coefficient of variation (CV) for dynamic, steady-state, anatomical and physiological traits across 19 horticultural genotypes. Maximum and minimum values are average values of 6-9 replicates. In the published article, there was an error in Figure 5 as published. Stomatal size should have been calculated as π × stomatal length × stomatal width/4, therefore, the numbers shown in Figure 5A should have been divided by four. The corrected Figure 5 and its caption “Stomatal size (A; SS_ab) and density (B; SD_ab) at the abaxial leaf side, and theoretical maximum stomatal conductance (C; g_s,max) of all 19 horticultural genotypes. Colours indicate crop species. Bars show means ± s.e. (n = 7-9). Letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Statistical test results of SS_ab, SD_ab and g_s,max were based on log transformation of the data. See Table 1 for full genotype names” appears below. Stomatal size (A; SS_ab) and density (B; SD_ab) at the abaxial leaf side, and theoretical maximum stomatal conductance (C; g_s,max) of all 19 horticultural genotypes. Colours indicate crop species. Bars show means ± s.e. (n = 7-9). Letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Statistical test results of SS_ab, SD_ab and g_s,max were based on log transformation of the data. See Table 1 for full genotype names. 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. In the published article, there was an error in Supplementary Data Sheet 1. All numbers along the x-axis of Figure S7A-E and along the y-axis of Figure S7E (i.e. stomatal size, which should have been calculated as π × stomatal length × stomatal width/4) in Supplementary Data Sheet 1 should have been divided by four. The correct material statement appears below.