INTRAPOPULATIONAL VARIATION

By:
Name : Dion Satrio Pambudi
Student ID : B1B015018
Entourage : VII
Group :3
Assitant : Quraisy Zakky

ANIMAL SYSTEMATICS I LABORATORY REPORT

MINISTRY OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY, AND HIGHER EDUCATION

JENDERAL SOEDIRMAN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF BIOLOGY
PURWOKERTO

2017
 CHAPTER I. INTRODCTION
A. Background

Several different definitions of population structure exist. A few researchers

define population structure as all factors that cause deviation from Heirdy-Weinberg
equilibrium. Others restrict their definition exclusively to population subdivision,
based on cultural or geographics factors. The relationship between genetic elements
(genes, genotypes, and phenotypes) has also been used to define the structure of
human populations. Population structure can be further subdivided into
intrapopulation and interpopulation differences. This division may be limited because
the boundaries between populations and their subdivisions are often arbitrary and all
human populations may be considered a subdivision of a single ancestral population
(Crawford, 2007).
Studies focusing on physiological variation among individuals, and its
possible evolutionary consequences, are scarce. A trait can only be a target of natural
selection if it is consistent over time, that is, a trait must be repeatable (Nespolo et
al., 2003). Intrapopulation variation may provide the means for evaluating the role
experential factors in behavioral development (Fragaszy et al., 2003). For example,
intrapopulation variation in resource use is widely reported among natural
populations of generalist predators with important implications for community and
evolutionary ecology. By exploiting a different subset of the resources available to a
population, individuals may experience different levels of competition, predation and
parasitism, and be more vulnerable to climatic fluctuations, as well as changes in
prey availability (Horswill et al., 2016).
Consequently, a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms that
produce individual variation in resource use and the ecological implications of such
diversity is required (Horswill et al., 2016).. In this lab practical, we are going to
learn about recognizing some variation within population, determining the species
based on the variation within population. We also going to learn about how to use
computer application software in the research of intrapopulational of
interpopulational variation.

B. Objectives

The objective of this laboratory activity are:

 1. Students are able to recognize some variation (age, sex, seasonal,
polymorphism, etc) within the population.
2. Students are able to determine the species based on the variation within
population.
3. Students are able to use computer application software in the research of
intrapopulational of interpopulational variation.

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Intrapopulation variation means variation within a population or subdivisions

of a population (Crawford, 2007). Genetically based intrapopulation variation in
dormancy has both ecological and evolutionary importance (Huffaker & Gutierrez,
1983). Genetic intrapopulation variation include sex-associated variations and non
sex-associated variations. Sex-associated variations include the primary sex
differences, secondary sex differences, and alternating generations. Non sex-
associated variations include continous variations and non-continous variations.
Genetic intrapopulation variation example is in multilid wasp, king parrot, and snail
(Badshah, 2015).
Non-genetic intrapopulation variation include individual variation in time,
social variations, ecological variations, and traumatic variations. Individual
variations in time include age variations, seasonal variations of an individual, and
seasonal variations of generations. Social variations can be seen in social insects like
honey bees with their definite groups within a colony in addition to the reproductive
castes (Badshah, 2015). Ecologically, it underlies certain types of phenotypic
variation that adapts populations to unpredictable or heterogenous environments
(Huffaker & Gutierrez, 1983). Traumatic variation include accidental and tetralogical
variations. The example of non-genetic variation can be seen in chameleon, honey
bee, and African butterfly (Badshah, 2015).
Phenon (pl. = phena). A sample of phenotypically [i.e., obersvably] similar
specimens; a phenotypically reasonably uniform sample. A phenon is a group of
organizations presumed to be representative of some later grouping, the members of
which all have mostly the same observable attributes. It is similar in meaning and use
to a deme or local population, though not so specifically geograpchically local in use
as these terms (McKelvey, 1982).
Sibling species is a term given to a set of species which is considered to have
descended from a common ancestor relatively recently, with much similarity in
morphology still retained so as to make it fairly difficult to identify separate species.
Indeed, sibling species have often resulted from a historical advance in taxonomy,
which enabled a species population, formerly considered to be a single species, to be
divided into several closely related species on the basis of biochemical, genetic,
behavioural, or morphological differences which influence reproductive isolation
(Tokeshi, 1999).
Intrapopulation variation has usually been explained as a result of genetic
drift in relatively small insular populations. However, several hypotheses bear on the
question of reduced allozymic and morphological variation in populations, the
hypotheses link variation patterns to differences in the amount of gene flow, habitat
complexity, resource partitioning and availability (niche-width differences),
population size (genetic bottlenecks), or some combination of these. The situation is
not conductive to hypothesis testing because all but one of these models predict low
variability on small islands and high variability on large islands (Case & Cody,
1983).
Quantitative studies that have examined ecological opportunity as a driver of
intrapopulation variation in resource use consistently report a positive correlation
between opportunity and resource use diversity (Horswill et al., 2016). While many
anecdotal accounts exist, few studies have directly assessed intrapopulation variation
in the use of marine/estuarine habitats by coastal populations, and no studies have
explicitly addressed variation in cross-ecosystem foraging behaviours between
upland freshwater wetlands and marine/estuarine habitats in Atlantic barrier island
systems (Nifong et al., 2014).
 According to Nifong et al. (2014), the importance of intrapopulation
characteristics (body size, sex and individual specialization) as key determinants of
the strength of predator-driven ecosystem connectivity resulting from cross-
ecosystem foraging behaviours. Understanding the factors, which contribute to
variation in cross-ecosystem foraging behaviours, will improve our predictive
undestanding of the effects of top-predators on community structure and ecosystem
function.
By using intrapopulation variatoin, we can also use it to understand how an
emerging infectious disease [the rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD)] that caused the
density of the eagles primary prey (rabbit Orcytolagus cuniculus) to dramaticall drop
across Europe impacted on resource use patterns of this endangered raptor. More
generally, it demonstrates the utility of studying variance structure ad questioning
assumptions impliit in the interpretation of stable isotope data from animals (Ecton,
2013).
ARLEQUIN is population genetics software environment able to analyze
RFLPs, DNA Sequences, microsatellites, standard multilocus data or allele frequency
data. It implements a variety of population genetics methods either at the intre-
population or at the inter-population level. It is distributed as PC executable from its
web site at http://anthropologie.unige.ch/arlequin/software/. A java version that woks
in Windows, Unix, and Macintosh environments can be requested from the authors
(Rodrigo & Learn Jr, 2002).
DNASP is a software package taht perfomrs extensive population genetic
analyses on DNA sequence data. DNASP estimates several measures of DNA
sequence variation within and between populations, as well as estimating linkage
disequilibrium, recombination, gen flow, and gene conversion. DNASP can also
carry out several tests of neutrality. It is distributed as Windows application from its
website at http://www.bio.ub.es/~julio/DnaSP.html (Rodrigo & Learn Jr, 2002).
A haplotype, derived from the phrase haploid genotype, refers to the allelic
constitution of a single chromosome or chromosomal region at two or more loci.
Each zygote is thus defined by two haplotypes. This term was first used for the
human HLA locus where a number of very closely linked and highly polymorphic
gene had been identified. During meiosis, given the close linkage between the loci,
alleles at neighboring genes would consegregate. Thus, although each HLA gene has
its specific allelic variation, close linkage between the genes makes each haplotype
(consisting of alleles at multiple loci) segregate as a single allele. In principle, a
haplotype is defined by segregation in families and can thus consist of allelic
variation at a number of loci (Birren et al., 1999).

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY

A. Materials

The tools used in this laboratory activity are specimen tray, forceps, gloves,
magnifying glass, microscope, camera, Arlequin 3.5 software, computer, and
stationary.
The material used in this laboratory activity are frog life-stage specimen,
crickets (male and female), common monitors, bees colony, nucleotide sequence of
several animals, and chloroform.

B. Methods

The method used in this laboratory activity are:

1. Frog life stage drawn, the picture of them taken, and the variation within the
population defined by the students.
2. Monitors and crickets (male and female) reproductive organs is drawn and
the picture of them taken by the students. The variation within population of
them is also defined by the students.
3. The bee colony observed and variation within the population of them is
defined by the students.
4. The goldfish polymorphism observed and the variation within the population
of them is defined by the students.
5. The interim reports completed by the students.
 CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A. Result

Table 4.1 Observation Result of Vertebrate Intrapopulational Variation

Details:
Komet
Mutiara
1
Lowo
Rancu
Panser

Scientific name : Carassius

auratus auratus

Local name : Goldfish or KOI fish

2
Classification :
Kingdom : Animalia
Phylum : Chordata
Class : Osteichythyes
3
Order : Cypriniformes
Family : Cyprinidae
Genus : Carassius
Species :Carassius
auratus auratus
Variation: Polymorphic variation
4

5
 Details:
Egg
1 Tadpole
Tadpole with back leg
Froglet with tail
Juvenile frog
Adult frog
2
Scientific name : Fejervarya
cancrivora

Local name : Ricefield frog

Classification :
3
Kingdom : Animalia
Phyllum : Chordata
Classis : Amphibia
Ordo : Anura
Oral
Familia :
4 Dicroglossidae
Aboral Genus : Fejervarya
Species :Fejervarya
cancrivora
Variation: Age variation
5

6
Details:
1. Ovarium
2. Cloaca
3. Hemipenis
Scientific name: Takydromus
sexlineatus
Local name : Lizard

Classification :
Kingdom : Animalia
Phyllum : Chordata
Classis : Reptilia
Ordo : Squamata
Familia : Lacertidae
Genus : Takydromus
Species :Takydromus
sexlineatus
Variation: Primary and secondary
sexual dimorphism variation
Table 4.2 Observation Result of Invertebrate Intrapopulational Variation
Details:
11 1. Antenna
2. Head
2
3. Thorax
4. Elytra
3
Scientific name: Oryctes
rhinoceros
4
Local name : Rhinoceros beetle

Classification :
Kingdom : Animalia
Phyllum : Arthropoda
Classis : Insecta
Ordo : Coleoptera
Familia : Scarabaeidae
Genus : Oryctes
Species :Oryctes
rhinoceros
Variation: Allometric variation
 Details:
1. Female cricket
2. Male cricket
3. Needle-shaped ovipositor
Scientific name: Grylluse sp.
11
Local name : Cricket

Classification :
Kingdom : Animalia
Phyllum : Arthropoda
Classis : Insecta
Ordo : Orthoptera
Familia : Gryllidae
Genus : Gryllus
Species : Gryllus sp.
Variation: Secondary sexual
2
dimorphism variation
 Details:
1. Worker
2. Queen
3. Drone
Scientific name: Apis mellifera
Local name : Honey bee

Classification :
Kingdom : Animalia

1 3 Phyllum : Arthropoda
2
Classis : Insecta
Ordo : Hymenoptera
Familia : Apidae
Genus : Apis
Species : Apis mellifera
Variation: Social variation

Table 4.3 Character Morphology Polymorphism Goldfish

Character Spesies
No
Morphology Panser Lowo Mutiara Comet Rancu

1 Body form Rounded Rounded Rounded Compressed Rounded

Non Non Non Non

2 Eyes Protruded
protuded protuded protuded protuded

3 Wen Presence - - - -

Non
4 Fin Complete Complete Complete Complete
complete

Caudal fin
5 Twin Twin Twin Flat Twin
type

Table 4.4 Amova Design and Result

Table 4.3.1 Standard Diversity

Table 4.3.2 Haplotype Level Computation

Table 4.3.3 Nucleotida Composition

 B. Discussion
In age variation can be seen in frog from vertebrate and from invertebrate is
butterfly. In age variation can be determine from their life stage during
metamorphosis. The characteristic can be seen based on morphology during their
age. In butterfly their character shown differently from egg, larvae, pupa, and
butterfly.
In seasonal variation have 1 leader that affect the entire of group. In vertebrate
animals can be seen in lion, gorilla and wolf. In vertebrate the lion has color darker
character, all of the alpha male showing characters strong, bigger and every animal of
their pack following them. In gorilla, the alpha male gorilla showing characteristic
silver color in their back. Social variation can also be seen in invertebrate such as
bees and termites that have monarchy system.
Habitat variation can be seen on bivalvia their character express different based
on habitat. Humeral and neurogenic is the ability morphology adaptation to
environment. In vertebrate can be seen in chameleon. In invertebrate can be seen in
octopus to changes their skin color or even their shape to avoid some predator.
Allometric variation occur when the deficiency of nutrient during larvae
development. Allometric variation can be seen in Oryctes rhinoceros horn. Sexual
dimorphism divided into primary and secondary, the example of this variation
animals are Gryllus sp., Butterfly, common vertebrate and Takydromus sexlineatus.
The character can be seen from set reproduction organ.
Gynandromorph varation showing character the male and female. Occur in one
organism and usually its easy to determine sexually. While in intersex variation have
character both female and male usually their reproduction organ sterile.
Hermaphrodite divided into protangynous, protogynous and synchronous.
Protangynous animals changes their sex organ from male to become female, the
example of this animal: Anguila bicolor. Protogynous animal changes their sex organ
from female to become male, example: Napoleon fish. While synchronous animals
can changes male and female sex, example: snail.
Uniparental disomy is an organism that can have an offspring without mating
the example of this animal komodo dragon. But, if they are doing parthenogenesis all
of their offspring is female. Because there are no DNA combination from the other
parent. They just get the exactly DNA from their mother.
Polymorphism is one species that have a lot of morphology variation. The
example of this animal are: Carrassius auratus auratus. There are 5 species of this
animal called: pancer, lowo, mutiara, comet and rancu. From the body shape comet
species more slim than other species. From the eyes pancer species mom-protuded,
while lowo protruded. From the body structure pancer have wen. All of the species
has complete dorsal fin, except rancu. And comet also has flat posterior fin the other
species has twin fins. Cryptic specis varation mean different species. But, almost
having the same morphology, example of this animals: Phodopus camboli.
 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION
A. Conclusion
Intra-population variation can be seen on animals vertebrate and invertebrate.
Vertebrate animal variation divided into: age variation, seasonal variation, social
variation, humeral and neurogenic, sexual dimorphism primary and secondary.
Hermaproditem pholymorphism and cryptic species. The type intra-population
showing a lot of characteristic.
In age variation can be seen from their metamorphosis and life stage. In seasonal
variation can be determine from difference in morphology and enthology. The social
variation can be seen from present leader among the group. Humeral and neurogenic
is the ability to adaptation their morphology to the environment. There are 2 type
sexual dimorphism primary and secondary. 3 hermaprodite type: protogynous,
protangynous, and synchronous. Polymorphism and cryptic species.

REFERENCES
Badshah, Aftab. 2015. Intrapopulation Variation.
https://www.slideshare.net/badshah77/intrapopulation-variations-9. Accessed
on April 3rd 2017.
Birren, Bruce, Eric D. Green, Philip Hieter, Sue Klapholz, Richard M. Myers, Harold
Riethman, Jane Roskams. 1999. Genome Analysis: A Laboratory Manual,
Volume 4 / Mapping Genomes. USA: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Case, Ted J. & Martin L. Cody1983. Island Biography in thr Sea of Cortez.
California: The Regents of the University of California.
Crawford, Michael H. 2007. Antropological Genetics: Theory, Methods, and
Applications. New York: Cambridg University Press.
Ecton, Q. Ashton. 2013. CIBIO, Vairao: Changes in Intrapopulation Resource use
patterns of an endagered raptor in response to a disesase-mediated crash in
prey abundance. Issues in Ecosystem Ecology. 81(6). pp. 1154 1160.
Fragaszy, Dorothy M. & Susan Perry. 2003. The Biology of Traditions: Models and
Evidence. New York: Cambride University Press.
Horswill, C., J. Matthiopoulos, N. Ratcliffe, J. A. Green, P. N. Trathan, R. A. R.
McGill, R. A. Phillips, T. C. OConnell. 2016. Drivers of intrapopulation
variation in resource use in a generalist predator, the macaroni penguin.
Marine Ecology Progress Series. 548. pp. 233 247.
Huffaker, Carl B. & Andrew P. Gutierrez. 1983. Ecological Entomology. Canada:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
McKelvey, Bill. 1982. Organizational Systematics: Taxonomy, Evolution,
Classification. California: The Regents of the University of California.
Nespolo, R.F., M.A. Lardies, F. Bozinovic. 2003. Intrapopulational variation in the
standard metabolic rate of insects: repeatability, thermal dependence and
sensitivity (Q10) of oxygen consumption in a cricket. Journal of
Experimental Biology. 206. pp. 4309 4315.
Nifong, James C., Craig A. Layman, and Brian R. Silliman. 2014. Size, sex and
individual-level behaviour drive intrapopulation variation in cross-ecosystem
foraging of a top-predator. Journal of Animal Ecology. 84. pp. 35 48.
Rodrigo, Allen G. & Gerald H. Learn. 2002. Computational and Evolutionary
Analysis of HIV Molecular Squences. New York: Springer.
Tokeshi, M. 1999. Species Coexistence: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives.
London: Blackwell Science Ltd.