Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Final production errors found

Posted by SalomonSanabria on 23 Dec 2015 at 19:32 GMT

We inform to the readers that two minor errors occurred during the final production process of this article:

First, the legend of Fig 1 is incomplete. The complete and correct legend of Fig 1 should be read as follows:

Tip labels indicate current taxonomic classification, voucher numbers and locality ID for all included terminals, except for those whose genetic information was retrieved from GenBank (*). Black vertical bars indicate the phylogenetic position of the identified species based on our integrative taxonomy approach (names and coloured symbols in front of the black bars). Particularly, the black vertical bars indicating the phylogenetic position of S. purpurascens, S. variabile, S. macrophallicum, S. sp. nov. 7, S. mexicanum, S. magnum and S. histrio represent cases where species differentiation was primarily morphological and they did not separate in individual monophyletic groups (See methods and results sections for details). The numbers positioned closely to the nodes indicate posterior probability values. G1, Monophyletic Group 1; G2, Monophyletic Group 2; G3, Monophyletic Group 3. S. p. purpurascens (1) intermediate form between S. p. purpurascens and S. p. minimum. S. m. mexicanum (2) intermediate form between S. m. mexicanum and S. m. histrio.

Second, the missing part of legend of Fig 1 was erroneously included as the fourth paragraph of the Phylogenetic reconstruction subsection in the Methods section.
Please ignore that paragraph.

The above-indicted errors do not affect in any way the results and/or conclusions of this article.

No competing interests declared.
report a concern respond to this posting