Correction to ‘Revisiting metazoan phylogeny with genomic sampling of all phyla’

Abstract

Since the publication of this manuscript, a number of minor errors have made themselves known, which do not, however, substantively alter our results or conclusions. During the construction of figure 5b, the terminal labels for Porifera and Ctenophorawere erroneously switched.We here provide a corrected version of the figurewith the proper labels, as in the original posterior consensus tree onwhich it is based (electronic supplementary material, figure S20). In the construction of the electronic supplementary material (ESM) figures, the cladogram given for electronic supplementary material, figure S7 (on which figure 2a,b was based) did not correspond to the posterior consensus summary conditions referred to in the figure caption. In the revised electronic supplementary material associated with this Correction, electronic supplementarymaterial, figure S7 now contains the correct cladogram referred to by its caption. Elsewhere in the electronic supplementary material figure captions (for electronic supplementary material, figures S7–S9, S17 andS20), theposterior consensus summary conditionsweremisreported. We have now corrected these captions to reflect parameter values of PHYLOBAYES ‘bpcomp’ that reproduce the trees shown in each electronic supplementary material figure. In the original electronic supplementary material, we also signified that cDNA libraries annotated with ‘*’ were amplified via the phi29-mRNA amplification (PMA) method, conflicting with the use of this symbol described in the electronic supplementary material, table S1 caption to mark rogue taxa. We have removed this conflict; ‘*’ is now intended only to refer to rogue taxa. SRA metadata describe which libraries were amplified via PMA. An incorrect NCBI accession number for the ‘Pedicellina sp. FHL’ library also appeared in electronic supplementary material, table S1, which has now been replacedwith the correct accession. Finally, an anomaly introducedby the journal’s copy-editing process, and not caught at proof-reading, erroneously removed one author, Gert Wörheide, from the author list of references 11, 12, 16 and 29. The correct references are given below: