text: We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We have included references to Frieda et al., 2017 (MEMOIR), Schmidt et al., 2017 and Spanjaard et al., 2018 in the revised manuscript (Introduction paragraph five).
  1) A first major comment is that the measure of accuracy used throughout the paper is very conservative, and more generally the tone that is struck in many parts of the paper is (we feel) overly conservative. Although strict accuracy and completeness are of course goals worth shooting for, they are not prerequisites these kinds of experiments to achieve biological insights. For example, lineage relationships between cell types might well be accurately inferred from the general topology of a tree that contained inaccuracies or uncertainty near its tips.
  As discussed in our response to reviewer 1, we have tried to be clearer regarding the fact that the required level of accuracy will depend on the application.