== Errors ID'd by Nature, to correct == 

 The results of what exactly Nature suggested should be corrected is out... italicize each bullet point once you make the correction.      

 * “Neutral mutations do not affect the organism's chances of survival in its natural environment and can accumulate over time, which might result in what is known as punctuated equilibrium, a disputed interpretation of the fossil record.” Evolution at DNA sequence and phenotypic level have been seriously confused here. 
 * “+ silent mutations: codes for the same amino acid, so has no effect”: “so” not justified; a silent mutation could e.g. affect the splicing and if so, could even be lethal. 
 * “; C → U, or A → HX (hypoxanthine).” This is not the full story, because e.g. a U in DNA would be recognized by the cell’s repair system and eliminated. But now the U pairs with A … (imagine replication). Or, the C is methylated, then you could get mC à T indeed. 
 * “There are three kinds of point mutations, depending upon what the erroneous codon codes for:” This applies only to coding regions (open reading frames), but only a very small fraction of e.g. the human genome represents coding regions.  
 * “Most insertions in a gene can either alter splicing of the mRNA, or cause a shift in the reading frame (frameshift),” How do the authors get to the “most”; my feeling is that this is not correct. The statement may also depend on the definition and composition of a gene; e.g., if it has large introns, it might be quite robust towards insertions or deletions.  
 * “* Loss-of-function mutations are the result of the protein encoded by the gene having less or no function.” Genes encoding only RNA, or nothing, can also lose their function.