The publisher regrets that the Fig. 3 was wrongly positioned in place of Fig. 4 and Fig. 4 in place of Fig. 3 in the published article. It has been corrected in the online version. Please refer the correct figures below: Also, the citation to Fig. 3 in section 3.4 of the text was erroneously deleted on two occasions. They should read as below: The persistent warming trend began near the base of C29r (cycle 18, 355 ky pre-KPB) and reached maximum temperatures by 280 ky (increase of 3.2 to 4 °C). In deep-sea sections the onset of Deccan-related climate warming is generally placed at 300 ky pre-KPB (Fig. 3). High temperatures persisted across the CF2/CF1 boundary (229 ky), then gradually decreased until 70 ky (cycle 3.5), followed by rapid 3–4 °C cooling by 45 ky (cycle 2.5) persisting until 25 ky (cycle 1.5) (Fig. 2). A comparison between Elles and South Atlantic Site 525A (Li and Keller 1998a) revealed a hiatus across the KPB into the underlying cool event (Punekar et al., 2014a). The same pattern is observed for South Atlantic Site 1262 (Barnet et al., 2018). Compared with Elles, the KPB hiatus in these deep-sea sites spans precession cycles 1 and 2 ( 35–40 ky) (Fig. 3). Further discussion on Sites 525A and 1262 age models can be found in Appendix A (Section A.5). The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2020.103312 © 2020 Elsevier B.V.