Internet Blunders

Wrong photo in Arkive’s ‘Edible Periwinkle’
The egg capsules photoed in areclearly not of the Edible periwinkle, as the text confirms :-its capsules have usually 3 eggs but may be up to 9, & Wikipedia gives further description
These eggs are of the netted dog whelk hinia reticulata (now known it seems as Tritia reticulata)
as seen in 6th & 7th photo.
(I’ve emailed them 2 days ago,so maybe they’ll respond)
NB there’s no sign of this image in

Wrong images are common across the internet, I have found plants and animals on wikipedia with completely wrong images. Although in most cases the wrong image is a very nice photo which may have been taken by someone who is not a taxonomist and who has put the wrong name on and the wiki person has not bothered to check.

The following is from a recent post on the British beetles Yahoo Group, and is tangentially relevant to this thread.

A paragraph from a recent ‘Taxacom’ post regarding a paper submitted to a peer-reviewed journal:

“In it, a number of plant-feeding insects and their presumed parasites were listed, all identified to species, but not a single one of which had been identified by a taxonomist. They had all been identified by simply looking for the nearest match in GenBank. They were all in genera that contained dozens to over a hundred species for which no GenBank sequences were available (and, on top of that, a quick check revealed that a few of the taxa showing on GenBank clearly have sequences from multiple species represented, and no way to know which ones actually were the taxon named). Several of the resulting IDs were therefore of species that didn’t even occur in that Hemisphere, and all but one or two of the rest were almost certainly wrong. The authors saw nothing wrong with this, the editor that sent the manuscript out for review saw nothing wrong with this, and the odds are good that my colleague may be the only one of the reviewers who DID see anything wrong with this. That is, it may indeed get published, despite being absolute rubbish.”