Corresponding author: Georgina D. Cepeda (
Academic editor: D. Defaye
Cepeda GD, Sabatini ME, Scioscia CL, Ramírez FC, Viñas MD (2016) Corrigenda: Cepeda GD, Sabatini ME, Scioscia CL, Ramírez FC, Viñas MD (2016) On the uncertainty beneath the name
It came to our attention after our manuscript was published that the caption of Table 1 was incomplete. We provide below the missing information, which is essential to the correct interpretation of the referred table.
a Species names and authors are as specified in the original text.
b Setation formulae of the first (P1), second (P2) and fourth (P4) swimming legs are summarized as follows: Re (inner setae; outer setae)/Ri (inner setae; outer setae), where Re: exopod, Ri: endopod. F: adult female; M: adult male; TL: total length (mm); Ur1 to Ur5: urosome segments; Fu: furca; CR: caudal rami. nd: no data.
* Character not explicitly stated in the original but taken from accompanying drawings for comparison purposes.
§ Most likely Crisafi (1959) described a late juvenile C5 as an adult male. In addition to the non-geniculated antennule, the urosome is 4-segmented with the last two segments fused (Fig. 3, p. 51 in Crisafi, 1959).