On 2014 May 20, Guri Giaever commented:

Erratum: In the report "Mapping the Cellular Response to Small Molecules Using Chemogenomic Fitness Signatures" by A. Y. Lee et al. (11 April 2014, p. 208), the chemical substructures, or fragments, in Fig. 2 were represented without R groups, leading some to misinterpret them as full chemical structures. To improve clarity, we revised Fig. 2 by (i) illustrating the substitution sites of fragments; (ii) labeling fragments numerically for reference to supplementary materials containing details about their derivation; and (iii) representing the dominant tautomers of signature compounds. We also discovered an error in our fragment generation software that, when corrected, resulted in slightly fewer enriched fragments being identified. In the revised Fig. 2, we removed redundant substructures and, where applicable, illustrated larger substructures containing the enriched fragment common among signature compounds. We include a table indexing the numbered fragments in Fig. 2 to the signature small molecules (table S8) and a supplemental figure (fig. S25) highlighting the enriched fragments within those molecules. In the first sentence of the penultimate paragraph, n = 20, not 28. We have also corrected a graphical misprint in the structure presented in Fig. 3 where the N-N bond was rotated in error. None of these changes affect the results or conclusions of this study. The HTML and PDF versions online have been updated to reflect the revised Figs. 2 and 3 and associated figure legend and text. The supplementary materials have been revised to add the new table and figure.

On 2014 Apr 14, Christopher Southan commented:

This paper is the subject of two technical blogposts already http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2014/04/11/biology_maybe_right_chemistry_ridiculously_wrong.php and http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2014/04/14/more_on_the_science_chemogenomic_signatures_paper.php

On 2014 Apr 14, Christopher Southan commented:

This paper is the subject of two technical blogposts already http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2014/04/11/biology_maybe_right_chemistry_ridiculously_wrong.php and http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2014/04/14/more_on_the_science_chemogenomic_signatures_paper.php

On 2014 May 20, Guri Giaever commented:

Erratum: In the report "Mapping the Cellular Response to Small Molecules Using Chemogenomic Fitness Signatures" by A. Y. Lee et al. (11 April 2014, p. 208), the chemical substructures, or fragments, in Fig. 2 were represented without R groups, leading some to misinterpret them as full chemical structures. To improve clarity, we revised Fig. 2 by (i) illustrating the substitution sites of fragments; (ii) labeling fragments numerically for reference to supplementary materials containing details about their derivation; and (iii) representing the dominant tautomers of signature compounds. We also discovered an error in our fragment generation software that, when corrected, resulted in slightly fewer enriched fragments being identified. In the revised Fig. 2, we removed redundant substructures and, where applicable, illustrated larger substructures containing the enriched fragment common among signature compounds. We include a table indexing the numbered fragments in Fig. 2 to the signature small molecules (table S8) and a supplemental figure (fig. S25) highlighting the enriched fragments within those molecules. In the first sentence of the penultimate paragraph, n = 20, not 28. We have also corrected a graphical misprint in the structure presented in Fig. 3 where the N-N bond was rotated in error. None of these changes affect the results or conclusions of this study. The HTML and PDF versions online have been updated to reflect the revised Figs. 2 and 3 and associated figure legend and text. The supplementary materials have been revised to add the new table and figure.