Corrigendum to: Variation in the size and composition of ejaculates produced by male American lobsters, Homarus americanus H. Milne Edwards, 1837 (Decapoda: Nephropidae)

Functional anatomy of the male reproductive system of the American lobster (Homarus americanus)

“…Hobbs et al () also did not report a third layer associated with spermatophores. It was also not observed by Pugh et al () for spermatophores obtained from either American lobster males or located in the female seminal receptacle. Hence, perhaps our seminal fluid and the large dense ovoid granules could be equivalent to the secondary intermediate and tertiary spermatophore layer described by Kooda‐Cisco and Talbot (, ), although the large dense ovoid granules are associated with the spermatophoric wall and do not form a layer.…”

“…Hobbs et al () also mentioned that the third coat recognized by Kooda‐Cisco and Talbot () could be based on the extruded spermatophore. Nonetheless, Pugh et al () also used the electrostimulation method and described their ejaculate (we refer to as the semen) as an elongated clear acellular material (i.e., seminal fluid including large dense ovoid granules) surrounding the sperm mass (i.e., spermatophore), but did not mention a tertiary layer from their histology.…”

“…As first reported by Herrick () for the American lobster, there is formation of a sperm plug, which blocks the female seminal receptacle after copulation, that originates from the seminal fluid produced in the MVD. Furthermore, Pugh et al () indicated that the percentage of seminal fluid within the semen suggests an adaptive investment strategy in relation to male size as larger males may invest disproportionately more in the seminal fluid. They hypothesized that the male investment strategy may involve an ontogenetic shift from producing spermatozoa to investing more in the seminal fluid, forming a larger sperm plug leaving no room for additional males to inseminate the female, as a form of paternity assurance and thus elimination or at least reduction of egg masses of mixed paternity.…”

“…Although the ultrastructure of spermatozoa has been described in detail (Talbot & Chanmanon, , ), other aspects of the reproductive system are still poorly understood. For instance, (a) there are no detailed anatomical and morphological description of the testes and its link with the vasa deferentia; (b) the histology of the entire vasa deferentia is incomplete; (c) the chemical composition of the spermatophore and the seminal fluid is unknown; and (d) there is a discrepancy between the anatomy of spermatophores suggested by Talbot and Helluy () and the one described by Pugh, Comeau, Benhalima, and Watson (). Using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), this study describes and establishes a new interpretation of: the structure and role for the testes, including spermatogenesis; the vasa deferentia; and the accessory structures (i.e., gonopores and the first pair of pleopods).…”

Egg production in relation to paternal weight in a freshwater caridean shrimp (Decapoda)

“…One of the main factors that determine male reproductive quality in some invertebrate species is body size: small males produce lower sperm quantities than larger males and could limit egg fertilization by providing smaller ejaculates to females (e.g. Wiernasz et al ., ; Ceballos‐Vázquez, Rosas & Racotta, ; Sato et al ., ; French & Hammack, ; Butler et al ., ; Pugh et al ., ; Alavi et al ., ; Vrech et al ., ). Moreover, small males may have a limited capacity to increase spermatophore volume when mating with large females.…”