# Corrigendum: Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability ?

Camille Lacour, Louise Seconda, Benjamin Allès, Serge Hercberg, Brigitte Langevin, Philippe Pointereau, Denis Lairon, Julia Baudry, Emmanuelle Kesse-Guyot

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

To cite this version:

Camille Lacour, Louise Seconda, Benjamin Allès, Serge Hercberg, Brigitte Langevin, et al.. Corrigendum: Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability?. Frontiers in Nutrition, 2018, 5, 10.3389/fnut.2018.00026. hal-02091333

HAL Id: hal-02091333

https://amu.hal.science/hal-02091333

Submitted on 16 Oct 2019

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Check for
updates

OPEN ACCESS

**Edited by:**

Giuseppe Grosso,
NNEdPro Global Centre for Nutrition
and Health, United Kingdom

**Reviewed by:**

Aida Turrini,
Consiglio Per la Ricerca in Agricoltura
e l'Analisi dell'Economia Agraria
(CREA), Italy

Alessandra Lafranconi,
Università degli studi di Milano
Bicocca, Italy

Alice Rosi,
Università degli Studi di Parma, Italy

*Correspondence:

Louise Seconda
l.seconda@eren.smbh.univ-paris13.fr

**Specialty section:**

This article was submitted to
Nutrition and Environmental
Sustainability,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Nutrition

Received: 05 March 2018

Accepted: 03 April 2018

Published: 18 April 2018

**Citation:**

Lacour C, Seconda L, Allès B, Hercberg S, Langevin B, Pointereau P, Lairon D, Baudry J and Kesse-Guyot E (2018) Corrigendum: Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability? *Front. Nutr.* 5:26. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2018.00026

# Corrigendum: Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability?

Camille Lacour<fnref n="1" />, Louise Seconda<fnref n="1" />,²*, Benjamin Allès<fnref n="1" />, Serge Hercberg<fnref n="1" />,³, Brigitte Langevin⁴, Philippe Pointereau⁴, Denis Lairon⁵, Julia Baudry<fnref n="1" /> and Emmanuelle Kesse-Guyot<fnref n="1" />

**Keywords:** provegetarian dietary pattern, organic food consumption, eco-friendly farming, diet-related environmental impact, sustainability

## A corrigendum on

### Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Diets: How Does Organic Food Consumption Contribute to Environmental Sustainability?

by Lacour C, Seconda L, Allès B, Hercberg S, Langevin B, Pointereau P, Lairon D, Baudry J and Kesse-Guyot E (2018) *Front. Nutr.* 5:8. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2018.00008

There was a mistake in the values of the first column of **Table 4** as published. The correct version of **Table 4** appears below. The authors apologize for this mistake. This error does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.

The original article has been updated.

**Conflict of Interest Statement:** The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2018 Lacour, Seconda, Allès, Hercberg, Langevin, Pointereau, Lairon, Baudry and Kesse-Guyot. 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 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.

<footnote n="1">¹ Equipe de Recherche en Epidémiologie Nutritionnelle (EREN), Centre d'Epidémiologie et Statistiques Sorbonne Paris Cité, INSERM (U1153), INRA (U1125), CNAM, Université Paris 13, COMUE Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France, ² Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie, Angers, France, ³ Département de Santé Publique, Hôpital Avicenne, Bobigny, France, ⁴ Solagro, Toulouse, France, ⁵ Nutrition Obésité et Risque Thrombotique (NORT), Aix Marseille Université, INRA 1260, INSERM UMR S 1062, Marseille, France</footnote>
<table><caption>TABLE 4 | Association between provegetarian score tertile and environmental impacts according to the level of organic food consumption, BioNutriNet study, 2014.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="3">GHG emissions (CO2eq/d)</th><th colspan="2">Overall</th><th colspan="6">Level of contribution of organic food to the diet</th></tr><tr><th rowspan="2">Mean<sup>a</sup></th><th rowspan="2">95%CL</th><th colspan="2">Low (0.03)</th><th colspan="2">Medium (0.23)</th><th colspan="2">High (0.63)</th></tr><tr><th>Mean<sup>a</sup></th><th>95%CL</th><th>Mean<sup>a</sup></th><th>95%CL</th><th>Mean<sup>a</sup></th><th>95%CL</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Q1 provegetarian score</td><td>4.56</td><td>(4.51-4.60)</td><td>4.59</td><td>(4.53-4.65)</td><td>4.56</td><td>(4.48-4.63)</td><td>4.10</td><td>(3.99-4.22)</td></tr><tr><td>Q2 provegetarian score</td><td>4.05</td><td>(4.01-4.08)</td><td>4.13</td><td>(4.08-4.18)</td><td>4.05</td><td>(4.00-4.10)</td><td>3.74</td><td>(3.66-3.81)</td></tr><tr><td>Q3 provegetarian score</td><td>3.62</td><td>(3.62-3.66)</td><td>3.73</td><td>(3.68-3.78)</td><td>3.68</td><td>(3.63-3.74)</td><td>3.34</td><td>(3.28-3.41)</td></tr><tr><td>Q4 provegetarian score</td><td>3.23</td><td>(3.20-3.27)</td><td>3.45</td><td>(3.39-3.51)</td><td>3.38</td><td>(3.33-3.43)</td><td>2.94</td><td>(2.89-2.99)</td></tr><tr><td>Q5 provegetarian score</td><td>2.27</td><td>(1.33-2.29)</td><td>2.93</td><td>(2.87-2.99)</td><td>2.72</td><td>(2.67-2.76)</td><td>2.12</td><td>(2.09-2.14)</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>b</sup> interaction</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.9711</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.2764</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><th colspan="9" style="text-align: left;">Cumulative energy demand (MJ/d)</th></tr><tr><td>Q1 provegetarian score</td><td>18.55</td><td>(18.43-18.67)</td><td>18.58</td><td>(18.40-18.75)</td><td>18.58</td><td>(18.39-18.78)</td><td>17.33</td><td>(17.05-17.63)</td></tr><tr><td>Q2 provegetarian score</td><td>17.43</td><td>(17.33-17.53)</td><td>17.62</td><td>(17.47-17.77)</td><td>17.47</td><td>(17.32-17.63)</td><td>16.53</td><td>(16.32-16.73)</td></tr><tr><td>Q3 provegetarian score</td><td>16.48</td><td>(15.52-16.58)</td><td>16.87</td><td>(16.70-17.04)</td><td>16.62</td><td>(16.47-16.78)</td><td>15.59</td><td>(15.41-15.77)</td></tr><tr><td>Q4 provegetarian score</td><td>15.62</td><td>(15.52-15.73)</td><td>16.42</td><td>(16.21-16.63)</td><td>16.10</td><td>(15.93-16.27)</td><td>14.62</td><td>(14.45-14.78)</td></tr><tr><td>Q5 provegetarian score</td><td>13.29</td><td>(13.21-13.37)</td><td>15.56</td><td>(15.33-15.79)</td><td>14.72</td><td>(14.56-14.89)</td><td>12.66</td><td>(12.56-12.76)</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>b</sup> interaction</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.9417</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.1044</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><th colspan="9" style="text-align: left;">Land occupational (m2/d)</th></tr><tr><td>Q1 provegetarian score</td><td>11.33</td><td>(11.14-11.41)</td><td>10.94</td><td>(10.78-11.10)</td><td>11.58</td><td>(11.39-11.78)</td><td>11.66</td><td>(11.36-11.96)</td></tr><tr><td>Q2 provegetarian score</td><td>10.26</td><td>(10.17-10.35)</td><td>9.89</td><td>(9.76-10.03)</td><td>10.31</td><td>(10.17-10.45)</td><td>10.64</td><td>(10.45-10.85)</td></tr><tr><td>Q3 provegetarian score</td><td>9.34</td><td>(9.26-9.43)</td><td>8.95</td><td>(8.81-9.09)</td><td>9.43</td><td>(9.29-9.57)</td><td>9.61</td><td>(9.44-9.79)</td></tr><tr><td>Q4 provegetarian score</td><td>8.51</td><td>(8.42-8.60)</td><td>8.26</td><td>(8.10-8.43)</td><td>8.68</td><td>(8.54-8.83)</td><td>8.50</td><td>(8.35-8.65)</td></tr><tr><td>Q5 provegetarian score</td><td>6.63</td><td>(6.57-6.69)</td><td>7.03</td><td>(6.87-7.19)</td><td>7.09</td><td>(6.97-7.21)</td><td>6.49</td><td>(6.41-6.57)</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>b</sup> interaction</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.7782</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.9696</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.0111</td></tr><tr><td>P<sup>c</sup> Q1 vs. Q5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>&lt;0.0001</td></tr></tbody></table>

GHG, Greenhouse gas. Models are adjusted on sex, age, and energy intake. <sup>a</sup>Adjusted mean were obtained with ANOVA models by level of organic food contribution in the diet. P-trend across the provegetarian score quintile are all <0.0001 and were obtained with linear contrast test by level of organic food contribution in the diet. <sup>b</sup>P for interaction between provegetarian score quintiles and the level contribution of organic food to the diet. <sup>c</sup>P-linear trend of Q'v.Q1 of provegetarian score. It reflects the linearity of the difference between the 1st and the others quintiles of provegetarian score across the level of organic consumption.