User:Daniel A. Colombo/Notebook/Biology 210 at AU

From OpenWetWare
Jump to: navigation, search

Zebrafish part 2

In the final week not much was changing in the zebrafish beside survivability. At the end of two weeks only 4 fish survived in total. one in the ethanol group and three in the control group. The fish had stopped growing and died very rapidly throughout the final week with numbers decreasing every day they wee observed. Behavior was also changing showing signs of hyperactivity and a few other symptoms of FAS. It was hard to get accurate measurements on the dissecting scopes because there was no accesible conversion for any of the scopes to measure the fish in cm rather than ocular spaces.

Zebrafish part ii During the second part of the zebrafish experiment the fish began to get feed with brill shrimp in order for them to self sustain. The fish were checked on every monday, Wednesday, and friday. From our last results even more fish were alive. I belive we miscounted the week before and have since fixed our data. The fish in the control solution seemed to be doing much better, growing a little big bigger and normally in comparison to the fish in the ethanol. Many of the symptoms of FAS were are already observed in the ethanol group, such as hyperactivity. Also the fish in the ethanol seemed to eat less shrimp than the fish in the control group.

Zebrafish Part 1

During this first step of lab we took 40 fertilized zebrafish embryos to begin with. 20 of those embryos were placed in well plates only containing 2-3 mls of deer park water. The other 20 were placed in 1% ethanol solution. All 40 seemed to be at the same embryological state. The fish were then left over the weekend and checked in on again monday. I am yet to get results from monday from my lab partner. I visited lab on 2 days after that on Wednesday. In the solution with just water about 16 fish seemed to be alive and swimming and were fed brine shrimp in order to continue their development. In the ethanol solution only about 8 fish had hatched and were moving much more slowly, in comparison to the control group. These eight fish were fed brine shrimp in order to continue their development. The fish well be checked in again friday during lab.


For this lab we set up our Bernese funnel in order to collect invertebrate samples from our transect. In order to set up the funnel we collected leaf litter from our transect and put some of that litter at the top of the funnel with a filter in the funnel, the funnel was then attached to about 50 mL of ethanol, where the invertebrate samples would fall. We then allowed our funnel to sit under the aluminum and the light for a week and then collected it and observed what we had collected in the ethanol.

Organism Phylum and class             Length          # in sample           Descrpition

Arthropoda insecta .25 mm 1 long segmented body, orange head, larvae

Arthropoda insecta .12mm 1 3 segments with antennas

Arthropoda insecta .06mm 2-5 small pointy head, legs, segmented body, black

Arthropoda insecta .26 mm 1 large antenna, legs, tail, gray

Arthropoda insecta .06mm 5 dark grey, legs, antenna, segmented body



''''Lab Journal Exercise 4'

Within our transect we did not much space in which to choose from for plants. Many of our plants came from the garden boxes where certain plants were supposed to be growing (ie. lettuce). A few of the plants we picked up were growing through the wood chips, and were more like weeds. It was hard to find a variety of plants due to the wood chips and the fact that our transect is a garden post-harvest in the winter.

Because I could not find a way to cleanly upload the characterization table, I formatted it into sentence form and added it here.

Plant #1 was a big leaf, pulled from the lettuce growing box. it had longitudinal vascularization with no particular pattern. It had a waxy coating along with a simple structure. It was also a gymnosperm. We classfied it as a dicot. Plant #2 was a smaller plant pulled from the wood chips with parallel vascularization. The plant grew straight up and was also a gymnosperm. We classified it as a monocot. Plant #3 it was clover-shaped and pulled from the wood chips. It had netlike vasculrizatiuon and a trap root. It was a gymnosperm and a dicot. Plant #4 was found in the wood chips again. It had a small stem with a bigger leaf. It had netlike vacuolization. It was a also a gymnosperm and a dicot. Plant#5 was found in the plant box and had a waxy coating. Parallel vascularization. This plant was alos a gymnosperm and a monocot.

[3] [4] [5] [6]

Journal Exercise 3

The water in our Hay infusion culture has evaporated slightly and with less water all of the material inside of the culture are getting closer together and the smell is growing worse. As the water evaporates there is more oxygen present for certain sediment and more of the culture is exposed to the air. I believe archaea species will not have grown on our agar plates because the bacterial species are more abundant and will have pushed out any archaean species.

With no tet on the plate there was more colony growth across all 8 agar plates. The more diluted the sample was the less bacterial growth there was in all cases. The tet was effective in inhibiting the growth of bacterial colonies from our Hay infusion sample. Tet does a very good job of prohibiting bacterial growth, in every scenario the colony growth on the plate with tet with exponentially lower than without tet. There are no species that were present on our plates that were resistant to the tetracycline. 

In our gram tests, we found only one of our four samples to be gram positive otherwise there were all negative. It was difficult to see the cells because they were so small however in all four samples there was motility, you could slighty see the movement of bacteria in the slide, it just looked like small beads were vibrating.