In the paper of Paul et al (2010) the close alignment of a genus called Neolipobranchius with the two Travisia sequences is a notable feature ("Interestingly, a clade comprising the two Travisia species and Neolipobranchius was recovered as sister group to Scalibregmatidae in all analyses"). I was intrigued by this and checked out Neolipobranchius. In taxonomy its two species have only the original single occurrences between them, and they don't seem similar in habitat or morphology. Unfortunately there is no telling where the Paul et al 'Neolipobranchius' specimen came from as there is no information on that given. In my opinion a group saying they had a sequence for a previously unknown Neolipobranchius sp. would have to be fairly brave, and would need to document it carefully. But that is really the background not the really strange bit.
There's mismatch between GenBank and the table in the paper of Paul et al on what are the accessions for the 18S sequences for Neolipobranchius sp. (GenBank AY612616, Paul table AY612615), Sclerobregma branchiata (GenBank AY612615, Paul table DQ790093 (which is Scalibregma inflatum in GenBank)) , Axiokebuita sp. (GenBank AY612614, Paul table AY612616), Scalibregma inflatum (GenBank DQ790093, Paul table AF508120 (Lipobranchius jeffreysii in GenBank)), Lipobranchius jeffreysii (GenBank AF508120, Paul table AF448161 (Polyophthalmus pictus in GenBank, which is an Opheliid)). The Paul table Polyophthalmus pictus AB106266 is Lobochesis bibranchia in GenBank. I stopped there. Thus the identities of AY612614, AY612615, and AY612616 are mixed up in the Paul table, plus a number of others.
Basically please could it be explained if these errors in the table have any significance for the actual matches used in the analyses? It may be of no consequence other than wasting a couple of hours of my time. However, I checked for an erratum but did not find one.
From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Read
Sent: Wednesday, 10 December 2014 10:47 a.m.
To: annelida from net.bio.net
Subject: [Annelida] Travisia & Travisia forbesii
Is there any update on why the current Travisia forbesii sequences in GenBank cluster in Opheliidae close to Ophelina, at odds with other Travisia species sequences (in Scalibregmatidae), given that T. forbesii is the type species? These authors below seemed to think there was some error in processing, ie "The sequences in GenBank appear to be incorrectly attributed to T. forbesii".
Paul, C., Halanych, K. M., Tiedemann, R. and Bleidorn, C. (2010). "Molecules reject an opheliid affinity for Travisia (Annelida)." Systematics and Biodiversity 8(4): 507 - 512.