In the original article, there was an error. Throughout the paper it was stated that ycf1, ycf2, accD, rpl22, and clpP were pseudogenized in Podostemaceae. However, new inspection of our data revealed that rpl22 and clpP are in frame and therefore, their functionality cannot be assessed based on sequence data alone. accD is highly divergent in Podostemaceae but is in frame in Apinagia riedellii, Marathrum utile and Tristicha trifaria. The gene is not in frame in Marathrum capillaceum and in Monostylis capillacea. Therefore, we confirm that accD may be a pseudogene in two of the evaluated Podostemaceae species, but it may be functional in three of them. We also found that rpl23, reported as present in our study, is not in frame and that rpl32, not mentioned in our paper, is present and functional. The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the other scientific conclusions of the article.