1 Correction to: Bull Math Biol (2018) 80:404–416 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-017-0381-3

The level-5 example of a network presented in Fig. 4 of Francis et al. (2018) is tree-based even though it states in the caption and in the text that this is not the case. This is because it contains the spanning tree with leaf-set \(\{x,y\}\) given by the path \(x, a, v_1, v_2, e, f, g, h, b, c, d, y\). The example should be replaced by the network in Fig. 1, which is level-5 and not tree-based. The network in Fig. 1 is not tree-based since any spanning tree with leaf-set \(\{x,y\}\) must contain the edges \(\{x,a\}\) and \(\{d,y\}\) as well as one of the paths \(b,h,h^{\prime },c\) or \(b,h^{\prime },h,c\) and one of the paths \(f,g,g^{\prime },e\) or \(f,g^{\prime },g,e\). It follows that the spanning tree then must also contain the edges \(\{a,b\}\), \(\{c,d\}\), \(\{a,f\}\), and \(\{e,d\}\), which is impossible. We thank Remie Janssen and Yukihiro Murakami for bringing this issue and replacement example to our attention.

Fig. 1
figure 1

A level-5 network that is not tree-based

Since drafting this erratum, other authors have independently pointed out the same error and made a more comprehensive corresponding fix (Fischer et al. 2018).