Correction to: Biochemical response and nutrient uptake of two arbuscular mycorrhiza-inoculated chamomile varieties under different osmotic stresses.

Correction to: Botanical Studies (2021) 62:22 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40529-021-00328-3

Following publication of the original article (Ebrahimi et al. 2021), errors were identified in Tables 1 and 4, The data are reversed in Tables 1 and 4 and the right decimal place is moved to the left decimal place.

Table 1

Analysis of variance of osmotic stress, arbuscular mycorrhiza and variety and their interactions effects on nutrients uptake in chamomile

Source of variation	df	Shoot concentration							Root concentration
		N	P	K	Zn	Fe	Cu	Mn	N	P	K	Zn	Fe	Cu	Mn
O	2	2114.47**	29.81**	1565.17**	65040.23**	13444.14**	2636.89**	3939.09**	164.26*	131.61**	29.66**	51988.02**	428.06**	4332.16**	2803.51**
AM	1	181.96**	25.66**	208.29**	4504.68**	1906.38**	2813.66**	3236.61**	41.25**	26.8**	506.32*	3663.02ns	453.25**	1328.25**	1652.08**
Var	1	201.80*	5.32**	55.60**	500.52**	550.13**	338.66**	413.24*	1.28**	26.1**	606.16**	1518.65**	56.42**	109.50**	42.18**
O × AM	2	13.38**	0.65**	0.04ns	289.45**	43.88**	9.66ns	26.66ns	3.32**	0.66ns	31.50**	25.52ns	32.16**	4.03ns	115.65**
O × Var	2	54.56**	2.69**	22.20**	111.87*	129.06**	60.60ns	196.69*	0.21ns	3.69**	18.66**	465.00**	19.14**	22.68*	22.26**
AM × Var	1	1.58**	0.96**	2.98ns	133.33ns	1.16ns	141.69*	269.56*	0.62*	0.30ns	19.65**	4.68ns	0.13ns	1.16ns	33.33**
O × AM × Var	2	5.46**	1.06**	5.80ns	28.28ns	68.35**	50.39ns	80.29ns	0.16ns	0.35ns	0.69ns	4.68ns	0.91ns	5.06ns	6.38ns
Error	36	0.223	0.019	2.46	34.11	1.16	28.68	45.64	0.146	0.30	2.62	14.40	1.51	4.46	4.06
CV%		2.05	1.20	3.15	3.69	1.34	8.34	10.23	4.63	5.08	4.64	3.12	3.26	3.98	3.66

O: Osmotic stress, Var: Varieties, AM: Arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculation, ns: non-significance at P ≤ 0.05; *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01, statistical significance

Table 4

Analysis of variance of osmotic stress, arbuscular mycorrhiza and variety and their interactions effects on osmolytes, activity of antioxidant enzymes (catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), polyphenol oxidase (PPO)), and shoot and root dry weights

Source of variation	df	Proline	Total soluble sugar	CAT	POD	PPO	Shoot dry weight	Root dry weight
O	2	136.50**	36248.39**	3864.92**	2.62**	217.80**	1.09**	0.002**
AM	1	16.54**	2693.25**	281.51**	0.13**	36.63**	0.083**	0.008**
Var	1	30.56**	753.58**	210.45**	0.34**	33.87**	0.015**	0.00086**
O × AM	2	1.12**	419.88**	26.07**	0.009**	4.40**	0.017**	0.00083**
O × Var	2	0.04**	79.14**	43.14**	0.09**	6.19**	0.148**	0.0001**
AM × Var	1	0.44**	6.87ns	2.59ns	0.01**	1.35**	0.0068**	0.0003**
O × AM × Var	2	0.43**	17.17ns	8.18**	0.013**	0.9**	0.0058**	0.00009ns
Error	36	0.006	7.40	0.832	0.0003	0.126	0.0001	0.00003
CV%		1.32	2.92	4.41	3.46	5.08	2.25	5.88

O: Osmotic stress, Var: Varieties, AM: Arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculation, ns: non-significance at P ≤ 0.05; *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01, statistical significance

The correct tables are given below.