In the original article, the number of isolates was misrepresented. The article should have listed 89, not 99 isolates. Additionally, the original article omitted one online resource used to search for acquired resistance genes.
The corrected sentences are:
A second analysis was performed using the closest 46 isolates to our 3 isolates, to zoom in on all of the CC-422 present in the database (total n=89).
Figure 2B: (b) Zoom in on the CC-422 and close CCs comprising 89 isolates, including the 3 Belgian isolates.
Previously, the sentences are shown below:
A second analysis was performed using the closest 46 isolates to our 3 isolates, to zoom in on all of the CC-422 present in the database (total n=99).
Figure 2B: (b) Zoom in on the CC-422 and close CCs comprising 99 isolates, including the 3 Belgian isolates.
The corrected sentence is:
Acquired resistance genes were searched via the ResFinder online plugin, which was developed for monitoring antimicrobial resistance in the USA [25], and mobile genetic elements were searched via the MobileElementFinder (MGEfinder) online software (https://cge.food.dtu.dk/services/MobileElementFinder/).
Previously, the sentence is shown below:
Acquired resistance genes were searched via the MobileGenetiqueElementFinder (MGEfinder) online software (https://cge.food.dtu.dk/services/MobileElementFinder/), which was developed for monitoring antimicrobial resistance in the USA [25].