ERROR: All pair coeffs are not set

Hello,
I am trying to perform annealing of a composite made of amorphous silica and crystalline silicon using shik/wolf and Stillinger-Weber potential, respectively. The former is a user-defined potential added to the LAMMPS src directory and rebuilt. I am using the 20 Nov 2019 version of LAMMPS.
IT RUNS PERFECTLY FINE when I use the shik potential to create the amorphous silica. However, when I invoke the hybrid command to create a composite, I get the error that All pair coefficients are not set. Please take a look at that specific part of the code.
units metal
atom_style charge
timestep 0.001
lattice custom 5.43 &
a1 0.9095 0.0000 0.0000 &
a2 -0.4547 0.7876 0.0000 &
a3 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 &
basis 0.4697 0.0000 0.0000 &
basis 0.0000 0.4697 0.6667 &
basis 0.5303 0.5303 0.3333 &
basis 0.4135 0.2669 0.1191 &
basis 0.2669 0.4135 0.5475 &
basis 0.7331 0.1466 0.7857 &
basis 0.5865 0.8534 0.2142 &
basis 0.8534 0.5865 0.4524 &
basis 0.1466 0.7331 0.8809

region simbox block 0 10 0 5 0 10 units lattice
#Type 1—>Oxygen Type -2—>Silicon
create_box 3 simbox
create_atoms 1 box basis 1 2 basis 2 2 basis 3 2 &
basis 4 1 basis 5 1 basis 6 1 &
basis 7 1 basis 8 1 basis 9 1

group gO type 1 1
group gSi type 2 2

set group gO charge -1.3920
set group gSi charge +2.7840

pair_style hybrid shik/wolf 8.0 10.0 sw
pair_coeff * * sw Si.sw NULL NULL Si
pair_style shik/wolf 8.0 10.0
pair_coeff 1 1 1120.528996 2.892741833 26.13207696 16800.0 0.2 0.2 #O-O
pair_coeff 1 2 23107.84764 5.097856735 139.6947857 66.0 0.2 0.2 #O-Si
pair_coeff 2 2 2797.979165 4.407320018 0.0 3423204 0.2 0.2 #Si-Si
pair_coeff 1 3 23107.84764 5.097856735 139.6947857 66.0 0.2 0.2 #O-Si(3)
pair_coeff 2 3 2797.979165 4.407320018 0.0 3423204 0.2 0.2 #Si(2)-Si(3)

What must be going wrong in this assignment?

Thanks in advance,
Kiran Raj K.

This line is the culprit. It resets the pair style, so that the hybrid pair style is no longer in use.

The pair_coeff commands are not consistent with using a hybrid pair style either.

Dear Dr. Axel,
Thank you for pointing out the mistake. I do appreciate the quick response as well.