ALLOPATRIC SPECIES CONCEPT

By :
Name : Tyssa Mutiara Ramadhanti Kharizma
Student ID : B1B016031
Entourage : II
Group :2
Assistant : Quraisy Zakky

ANIMAL SYSTEMATICS I LABORATORY REPORT

MINISTRY OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY, AND HIGHER EDUCATION

JENDERAL SOEDIRMAN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF BIOLOGY
PURWOKERTO
2018
 I. INTRODUCTION

A. Background

New species emerge through speciation or speciation processes. Recent day this
process is still in a heated debate for biologists and evolutionists. The key to this
speciation is obtained from the disclosure of information about genetic information that
can undergo genetic mutations. The focus of this debate extends to the variations in
sources of relatively important differences. For the examples are geographic isolation or
ecological differences (Huggett & John, 2004). According to Mayr (1963), he mentioned
that the biodiversity of earth is the result of two main processes, namely speciation and
extinction. Species that are a group of interbreeding (intergroup groups) and different
from other groups who are married. The exchange of genetic material between the groups
through mechanisms for example (both before and after marriage).
Speciation is the process of formation of new species. There are several opinions
about the speciation process. There is an opinion that the speciation process occurs only
in the past and does not occur today, whereas other opinions suggest that speciation
persists to this day. To understand the process of speciation, keep in mind that the state
of the earth in the past is not the same as the present. The former warmth of the earth
surface becomes cold, the land begins to form, thus there is a new habitat. The formation
of plants, forests, grasslands is not simultaneous, and occurs in a number of places causing
the emergence of new habitats that previously did not exist. Climatic conditions in the
past have also changed. Glacial events, volcanic eruptions, the formation of land causes
the face of the earth undergo great evolution (Waluyo, 2005).
Under the polytypic species concept diagnosable allopatric entities can be
classified as subspecies within the same species, unless there is evidence for reproductive
isolation, or the taxa would be unlikely to fuse when they occur in sympatry. The
polytypic species concept differs from the phylogenetic species concept, in which
diagnosable entities can be classified as species regardless of whether they blend together
in zones of overlap (Lukhtanov et al., 2015). Sympatric speciation is today generally
viewed as plausible, and some well-supported examples exist, but its relative contribution
to biodiversity remains to be established (Rosser et al., 2015). Kinship is one of the
aspects studied in the animal taxonomy which includes two terms, namely phylogenetic
kinship and phenetic kinship. Phylogenetic kinship is a kinship based on the relationship
of phylogeny between one taxon and another. While the phenetic kinship is a kinship
based on the similarities and differences in the characteristics seen in the taxon (Clifford
& Stephenson, 1975).
The classification of the phylogenetic system arises after the theory of evolution
put forward by biologists. It was first proposed by Charles Darwin in 1859. According to
Darwin, there is a relationship between classification and evolution. The phylogenetic
system is structured according to the proximity of kinship between taxon to each other.
In addition to reflecting the similarities and differences in morphological and anatomical
or physiological traits, this system explains why living things all have molecular and
biochemical similarities, but vary in their form and function in every living creature
(Rohfl, 1993).

B. Objectives

The objectives of this laboratory activity are:

1. Understanding the speciation concept.
2. Understanding the fish speciation concept.
3. Using computer application software that supports the research of speciation concept.
 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Taxonomic and systematic literature pertaining to issues concerning species,

speciation models, and whether species even exist in nature is voluminous. Speciation is
a genetic process and the status of a species is best decided with genetic data. Even in
cases where the species are not distinguishable based on morphological features. Beyond
such simple cases, the diverse nature of biological entities may cause difficulties in
applying any species concept because examples are not clear cut (Baker & Bradley,
2006). According to Muzayyinah (2012), species can be defined as a taxon used in the
taxonomy to refer to one or several groups of similar individuals (population) and can
mutually fertilize each other within its group (mutually dividing genes) but not with other
group members. Then speciation can be defined as a creative process that leads to the
creation of species diversity. The newly formed species is capable of exchanging genes
or interbreeding to produce fertile offspring. The members of a species have the same
gene pool and the free gene flow between the organisms.
According to Stearns et al. (2003), factors driving the occurrence of speciation,
namely geographical isolation ˗ most biologists have argued that the initial factor
affecting speciation is the separation of geography, because as long as populations of the
same species are still directly or not connected, genes flow can still occur. However, if an
obstacle to the distribution of species (geographical causes) occurs, there will be no
exchange of gene arrangements in the population system and evolution will take place on
its own. The longer the two populations will be more different because it has evolved in
its own way; reproductive isolation ˗ geographical isolation as an external factor
(extrinsic) that causes the occurrence of speciation. In the long span of time there will be
an intrinsic isolation mechanism, in which the properties possessed by the population can
prevent mixing of two populations or preventing inbreeding if the two populations are
reunited once the separation limit is gone. Therefore, it can be said that speciation begins
with an external barrier which makes the two population systems completely alopatric
(having different places), but this situation is not perfect until this population undergoes
an intrinsic process that keeps them alopatric or their gene pool separate even though they
are sympatric (have the same place).
According Widodo et al. (2003), speciation models at the population level there
are two that are as follows:
1. Allopatric speciation
The occurrence of numerous allopatic speciation is evidenced by the study of
geographical variations. Geographically diverse species of all characters may inhibit the
exchange of genes between sympatric species. Geographically separated populations can
be isolated by behavioral differences compared to adjacent populations. The isolated
population may not be able to interbreed if they meet, because the form is very divergent
and then entered into the sympathy but there is no interbreeding. Allopatric speciation is
a gradual isolation mechanism. Example: The Acaulhiza pusilla bird is widespread on the
Australian continent and has a slightly different population of A. Ewingi.
2. Sympathetic Speciation
The sympatric speciation model includes gradual and spontaneous speciation.
Most models of sympatric speciation are still in controversy, except in spontaneous
speciation models and polyploidy speciation occurring in plants. If a hybrid between two
diploid species forming tetraploid will be able to enlarge the reproductive isolation of the
diploid parent. Triploid offspring due to backcross have a high proportion of aneuploidy,
because gametes carry congenital defects. Interbreeding restrictions between diploid and
tetraploid forms may appear, but not in polyploidy.
3. Parapatric Speciation
This is a growing isolation of reproduction in several genes of flow among
populations. In the population there is an alela that affects the occurrence of reproductive
isolation in the population. So the species in the population can not do marriage (gene
exchange).
The fish called baceman having morphology formed of the Bagridae family has
the characteristics of elongated body shape, slightly flat, large fish head, fat fins on the
back same length with anal fin, the edge of free eye space, lips are not jagged that can be
moved, the jaw there are 3-4 pairs of tentacle long palms, short backbone fins, caudal fin
fins and has a pectoral fin with sharp and very strong and jagged hard fingers (Kottelat
1993). Classification of fish baceman according to Djhuanda (1981), namely Phylum:
Chordata, Classis: Actinopterygii, Order: Siluriformes, Familia: Bagridae, Genus:
Hemibagrus, Species: Hemibagrus nemurus.
Hemibagrus nemurus has a local name of Baung fish and its body shape is
combined with a subterminal mouth position. This fish has four pairs of tentacles, the
length of the upper jaw reaches the back of the abdominal fin, while the length of the nose
reaches the eye, straight rib line, fat fins the same length as the anal fin and the tip of the
black fat fin, the last fingers on the dorsal fin and pectoral fins are jagged and on the top
of the rough head, the shape of the caudal fin fins. The morphological characteristics of
H. nemurus are as follows: sharp hard-sharp dorsal fin, short anal fin, caudal fin fin, have
a fat fin as long as the anal fin apart from the dorsal fin, have 12-13 anal fin radius and
the total length can reach 57 cm. (Bhagawati et al., 2013).
MEGA or Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis is freely available software
used to perform statistical analyzes of molecular evolution and to construct phylogenetic
trees (Herrel et al., 2008). In version 6.0, MEGA now enables the inference of timetrees,
as it implements the RelTime method for estimating divergence times for all branching
points in a phylogeny. A new Timetree Wizard in MEGA6 facilitates this timetree
inference by providing a graphical user interface (GUI) to specify the phylogeny and
calibration constraints step-by-step. In version 6.0, MEGA already added facilities for
building molecular evolutionary trees scaled to time (timetrees), which are clearly needed
by scientists as an increasing number of studies are reporting divergence times for species,
strains, and duplicated genes. For this purpose, MEGA6.0 have implemented the RelTime
method, which can be used for large numbers of sequences comprising contemporary data
sets, is the fastest method among its peers, and is shown to perform well in computer
simulations (Tamura et al., 2013).
Using calibrations to translate relative times to absolute times: The relative times
produced by the RelTime method can be directly converted into absolute times when a
single known divergence time (calibration point) based on fossil or other information is
available. Confidence intervals for time estimates: MEGA6 also provides confidence
intervals for relative and absolute divergence times, which are necessary to assess the
uncertainty in the estimated time and test biological hypotheses. Timetree Wizard: In
practice, the estimation of timetrees can be cumbersome, as one must provide a
phylogeny, a sequence data set, and calibration points with constraints. To simplify this
process, MEGA 6.0 have programmed a Timetree Wizard to enable users to provide all
of these inputs through an intuitive step-by-step graphical interface. The next step
in Timetree Wizard is for the user to select various analysis options in the Analysis
Preferences Dialog, including the types of substitutions to consider ( nucleotide, codon,
or amino acid), evolutionary model describing the substitution pattern, distribution of
substitution rates among sites (uniform or gamma-distributed rates and the presence of
invariant sites). MEGA 6.0 have added the subtree-pruning-and-regrafting (SPR)
algorithm to search for the optimal tree under the maximum likelihood (ML) and
maximum parsimony (MP) criteria. The final trees produced by SPR heuristic search
were, on average, more optimal than the true tree. Therefore, MEGA 6.0 heuristic
searches are expected to perform well in practical data analysis (Tamura et al., 2013).
 III. METHODOLOGY

A. Materials

The instruments used in this laboratory activity are used in practical allopatric
speciation concept are the MEGA software, tweezers, stationery, styreofoam
The materials that are used in practical allopatric speciation concept are
baceman fish (Hemibagrus nemurus).
B. Methods

The methods used in this laboratory activity are:

1. Animal specimen is placed on styreofoam with milimeter block.
2. Measured the morphological characteristic based on the points, and the result is
drawed and noted.
3. Counted the morphological differences among specimens.
4. Constructed phylogenetic tree from the previous counts of morphological differences.
5. Analyzed the relantionship among specimen with MEGA software.
6. Completed the interims reports.
 REFERENCES

Baker, R. J., & Bradley, R. D., 2006. Speciation in mammals and the genetic species
concept. Journal of mammalogy, 87(4), pp. 643-662.

Bhagawati, D., Abulias, M.N., & Amurwanto, A., 2013. Fauna Ikan Siluroformes dari
Sungai Serayu, Banjaran, dan Tajum di Kabupaten Banyumas. Jurnal MIPA.
36 (2), pp. 112-122.

Clifford & Stephenson., 1975. An Introduction to Numerical Classification. New York:

Academic Press.

Djuhanda, T., 1981. Dunia Ikan. Bandung: Armico.

Herrel, A., Huyghe, K., Vanhooydonck, B., Backeljau, T., Breugelmans, K., Grbac, I.,
Van Damme, R., & Irschick, D.J., 2008. Rapid large-scale evolutionary
divergence in morphology and performance associated with exploitation of a
different dietary resource. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
105 (12), pp. 4792–5.

Huggett & John, R., 2004. Fundamental of Biogeography. New York: Routledge Taylor
& Francis.

Kottelat, M., 1993. Freshwater Biodiversity in Asia LTith Special Reference to Fish.
Washington DC: The World Bank.

Lukhtanov, V. A., Dantchenko, A. V., Vishnevskaya, M. S., & Saifitdinova, A. F., 2015.
Detecting cryptic species in sympatry and allopatry: analysis of hidden diversity
in Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus) butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Biological
Journal of the Linnean Society, 116(2), pp. 468-485.

Mayr, E., 1963. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambrige: Harvard University Press.

Muzayyinah., 2012. Jejak Evolusi dan Spesiasi Marga Indigofera. Jurnal Bioedukasi,
5(2), pp.1-12.

Rohlf, F. J., 1993. Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System. New York:
Applied Biostatistic Inc.

Rosser, N., Kozak, K. M., Phillimore, A. B., & Mallet, J., 2015. Extensive range overlap
between heliconiine sister species: evidence for sympatric speciation in
butterflies?. BMC evolutionary biology, 15(1), 125.

Stearns, Stephen, C., Rolf, F., & Hoekstra., 2003. Evolution an Introduction. USA:
Oxford University Press.

Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A., & Kumar, S. 2013. MEGA6:
Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and
Evolution. Ncbi, 30(12), pp. 2725–2729.

Waluyo, L., 2005. Evolusi Organik. Malang: UMM Press.

Widodo, S., Erik, P.P., & Taufik, T., 2003. Evolusi. Malang:UM Press.