Table 2. In silico T-RF lengths of rbcL sequences.
| Clade in Figure 1 | Predicted T-RF length in silico (bp) | T-RFLP-category§ | Abbreviation (clade) |
| Clade A (Proposis spp.)* | 306 | Proposis spp./Halimeda borneensis | Prsp/Habo (A/D) |
| Clade B (Rhipidosiphon lewmanomontiae) | 331 | Rhipidosiphon lewmanomontiae | Rhle (B) |
| Clade C (Rhipidosiphon spp.) | 366 | Rhipidosiphon spp. | Rhsp (C) |
| Clade D (Halimeda borneensis)* | 306 | Proposis spp./Halimeda borneensis | Prsp/Habo (A/D) |
| Clade E (Halimedineae spp. 1)† | 138 | Halimedineae spp. 1/Rhipiliaceae spp. | Hasp1/Risp (E/G) |
| Clade F (Caulerpella spp.)‡ | 191/291 | Caulerpella spp. | Casp (F) |
| Clade G (Rhipiliaceae spp.)† | 138 | Halimedineae spp. 1/Rhipiliaceae spp. | Hasp1/Risp (E/G) |
| Clade H (Halimedineae spp. 2) | 260 | Halimedineae spp. 2 | Hasp2 (H) |
*
T-RF lengths of Proposis spp. and Halimeda borneensis were the same and indistinguishable.
†
T-RF lengths of Halimedineae spp. 1 and Rhipiliaceae spp. were identical and indistinguishable.
‡
Caulerpella spp. was composed of two subtypes having two distinct T-RFs (191 and 291 bp, respectively).