Correction: Four priority areas to advance invasion science in the face of rapid environmental change (Ref: Environ. Rev. 29(2): 119–141 (2021), 10.1139/er-2020-0088)

Ref: Environ. Rev. 29(2): 119–141 (2021) dx.doi.org/10.1139/er-2020-0088. In discussing the vital importance of taxonomic expertise for managing biological invasions, we noted that difficulties in recognizing cryptic species can challenge the use of classical biological control. As an example, we described control efforts targeting Adelges tsugae, the hemlock woolly adelgid, during which collections from Japan of the intended biocontrol insect Laricobius osakensis were inadvertently contaminated with individuals of its cryptic congener L. naganoensis. Specifically, we wrote (p. 130) “The U.S. Department of Agriculture subsequently permitted further introduction of L. naganoensis, requiring no risk assessment or monitoring, simply because it was too difficult to distinguish it readily from its congener”. We should have specified that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, citing the difficulty of distinguishing between the two species, approved release of L. naganoensis based on the opinion that it was unlikely to establish and, if it did, it would probably not have a harmful impact (USDA 2017). Furthermore, we wish to clarify that despite government approval L. naganoensis was never released into eastern North America.