Abstract
The sectional classification of the genus Malus should correctly read Eumalus (Malus).
In the Introduction section, the third paragraph should read “Most species are diploid () and cross-pollinated, but Way et al. [10] list Malus coronaria from the American section Chloromeles as apomictic and either triploid or tetraploid. They also note deviations from the normal type in section Eumalus and Sorbomalus: M. sikkimensis, M. hupehensis and M. toringoides (apomictic and triploid), M. sargenti (apomictic and tetraploid), and M. spectabilis and M. baccata (nonapomictic and either diploid or tetraploid),” while the sixth paragraph in the Discussion section should be written as “Harris et al. [30] analysed nuclear rDNA and chloroplast DNA sequences and placed Malus trilobata and Malus florentina in the same cluster. The present measurement of the DNA content would support the results of Harris et al. [30]. Qian et al. [7] characterized Malus florentina as a new section Florentinae. 25 species including 17 hybrid species demonstrated 1Cx DNA contents in the interval between −5% and +5% of the median of the diploid species. All species belong to the section Eumalus and Sorbomalus, series Sieboldianae and Kansuenses, and have native distribution in Asia and Europe with the exception of the species M. fusca spread on the West coast of North America.” Finally, the word Euromalus should be changed into Eumalus in all the occasions mentioned in Table 1 as well.