Corrigenda: Polyphyly of the traditional family Flabellinidae affects a major group of Nudibranchia: aeolidacean taxonomic reassessment with descriptions of several new families, genera, and species (Mollusca, Gastropoda). https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.717.21885.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.717.21885.].

In our recently published study the traditional underwent a major revision and 17 new genera were proposed. The Abstract should read “17 new genera”.

Immediately after publication our attention was drawn to homonymy of three generic names: , , and with Maksimova, 1977, an extinct trilobite, Hoffmann, 1929, a junior synonym of , a pulmonate slug, and Repina & Okuneva, 1969, another extinct trilobite. In a stroke of irony the two trilobite names were published in little known Russian journals, with Russian descriptions. To avoid homonymy, throughout the text, figures, and all supplementary materials replacement names for these three genera are as follows: Korshunova et al., nom. n., Korshunova et al., nom. n., and Korshunova et al., nom. n. We are grateful to Jimmy Gaudin for alerting us to this unfortunate circumstance. Other corrections are as follows:

On p. 14 “…the same region our…” should be “…the same region as our…”

On p. 16 “…additional rows of of small…” should be “…additional rows of small…”

On p. 17 In the diagnosis of should be “…rachidian tooth with up to 15 denticles...”

On p. 18 “…cusp of nealy 1/3 of the tooth…” should be “…cusp of nearly 1/3 of the tooth…”

On p. 19 “… Voldochenko, 1946…” should be “… Volodchenko, 1946…”; “…(Figs 7, 10H, I)…” should be “…(Figs 7, 11H, I)…”; “…(Fig. 10G)…” should be “…(Fig. 11G)…”

On p. 26 Table 1. In fifth column: minimum uncorrected p-distances between and should be 17.2%.

On p. 27 “…original description in Verril, 1880…” should be “…original description in Verrill, 1880…”; “…detailed redescripton in Kuzirian…” should be “…detailed redescription in Kuzirian…”

On p. 31 In the diagnosis of should be “...orange-brown to reddish brown, sometimes blackish…”

On p. 33 In the diagnosis of should be: “…orange-brown to salmon, bright red, and dark brown, sometimes almost black...”

On p. 35 In the diagnosis of should be “...delineated from central cusp...”

On p. 37 In the diagnosis of should be “…delineated from central cusp...”

On p. 52 “…inclusion of and is not…” should be “…inclusion of and is not…”; “…and “” must be…” should be “…and “” must be…”

On p. 53 “…related to …” should be “…related to …”

On p. 54 “… (pleuroproctic in higher acleiproctic position)...” should be “…(pleuroproctic in higher acleioproctic position)…”

On p. 57 “…on distinct elonagate elevations…” should be “…on distinct elongate elevations...”; “… (pleuroproctic in higher cleiproctic position)…” should be “… (pleuroproctic in higher acleioproctic position)…”

On p. 58 In the diagnosis of should be “….apical parts of cerata without white pigment... rachidian tooth with up to seven denticles, central cusp without small denticles, double proximal receptaculum seminis…”.

On p. 66 “…due to the lack of the morphlogical description…” should be “…due to the lack of a morphological description…”

On p. 68 “…always posses oral glands…” should be “…always possess oral glands…”

On p. 74 “…reduction of the triserial radula into a unserial one…” should be “reduction of the triserial radula into a uniserial one…”

On p. 79 Figure 3. Should be Bergh, 1886

On p. 91 “(Cothouy, 1839)” should be “(Couthouy, 1838)”

Supplementary material 2. should read Bergh, 1886. Localities for (Bergh, 1890) GQ292023 and (Hirano & Kuzirian, 1991) GQ292022 should be “WA, USA”.