Corrigenda: Cepeda GD, Sabatini ME, Scioscia CL, Ramírez FC, Viñas MD (2016) On the uncertainty beneath the name Oithona similis Claus, 1866 (Copepoda, Cyclopoida). ZooKeys 552: 1–15. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.552.6083
expand article infoGeorgina Daniela Cepeda, Marina Sabatini§, Cristina Scioscia|, Fernando Ramírez, María Delia Viñas§
‡ Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo Pesquero, Mar del Plata, Argentina
§ Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras (IIMyC), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Consejo Naci, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales Bernardino Rivadavia (CONICET-MACNBR), Avenida Ángel Gallardo 470, C1405DJR Buenos Aires, Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina
¶ Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo Pesquero (INIDEP), Paseo Victoria Ocampo No 1, B7602HSA Mar del Plata, Argentina., Mar del Plata, Argentina
Open Access

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).