Diversity and DistributionsVolume 23, Issue 3 p. 341-341 CorrigendumOpen Access Corrigendum This article corrects the following: Space invaders; biological invasions in marine conservation planning Sylvaine Giakoumi, François Guilhaumon, Salit Kark, Antonio Terlizzi, Joachim Claudet, Serena Felline, Carlo Cerrano, Marta Coll, Roberto Danovaro, Simonetta Fraschetti, Drosos Koutsoubas, Jean-Batiste Ledoux, Tessa Mazor, Bastien Mérigot, Fiorenza Micheli, Stelios Katsanevakis, Lucy Hawkes, Volume 22Issue 12Diversity and Distributions pages: 1220-1231 First Published online: October 5, 2016 First published: 09 February 2017 https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12526AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12491 Space invaders; biological invasions in marine conservation planning Volume 22, Issue 12, Pages 1220–1231, Article first published online: 5 October 2016 In Giakoumi et al. (2016), a writing error was made in the preparation of Fig. 4 and the ‘Methods’ section of the manuscript such that a reference has been omitted. This omission is corrected below, with an additional reference to Albouy et al. (2015) for data provenance. The fish distribution data and life-history traits data are from Albouy et al. (2015) and not from Guilhaumon et al. (2015) as previously written (a link to Albouy et al. (2015) exists in the ‘data availability’ section of the manuscript). Correction for the ‘Methods’ section. Methods Conservation plans: applying the ‘protect’, ‘avoid’ or ‘ignore’ approaches in two Mediterranean case studies Case study 2: endemic fish species Data on the distribution of 80 endemic fish species were obtained from Albouy et al. (2015). Correction for the legend of Fig. 4. Figure 4 Fish species case study (data from Albouy et al., 2015). Difference in planning unit (12,828 cells, 10 × 10 km) selection frequency, from Marxan outputs, when following the different approaches: (a) ‘ignore’ versus ‘protect’, (b) ‘ignore’ versus ‘avoid’ and (c) ‘avoid’ versus ‘protect’. Planning units in red are those with a higher selection frequency in the ‘ignore’ scenario, in orange those with higher selection in the ‘protect’ scenario and in blue those with higher selection in the ‘avoid’ scenario. Planning units are black if they had maximum selection frequency (1000) in all three scenarios. Scatter plots show the selection frequency for the planning units under the different scenarios. For the maps, we used ETRS89 Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area projection. Reference Albouy, C., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Velez, L., Guilhaumon, F., Meynard, C.N., Boyer, S., Benestan, L., Mouquet, N., Douzery, E., Aznar, R., Troussellier, M., Somot, S., Leprieur, F., Le Loc'h, F. & Mouillot, D. (2015) FishMed: traits, phylogeny, current and projected species distribution of Mediterranean fishes, and environmental data. Ecology, 96, 2312– 2313. Volume23, Issue3March 2017Pages 341-341 ReferencesRelatedInformation