LTU3IND Skill Development by JASMINE KARU

Evidence One: Laboratory Skills

21025056_1 — 2024-06-25 06:42:46 UTC

Attached is a video of me completing a bottle change for one of the fly cages. Bottle changes are required for 15 cages in the 26°C CT cabinet, and 16 cages in the 20°C CT cabinet. Tips are also completed for 18-50 bottles per week. This video shows evidence that I have improved in speed and efficiency for cage maintenance and also shows evidence of labelling. Each bottle needed to be labeled in the same colour as the bottle being removed and include the cage details, the food batch number, and the date.

Evidence Two: Experimental Design

21025056_1 — 2024-06-25 06:42:58 UTC

[Methods Section - attached is a photo of the arena set up]

Animals and treatment groups

The stock species for this experiment were maintained in the fly lab at La Trobe University. The model species chosen for this experiment were Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila hydei. Both species were cultivated in a CT cabinet at 20 ± 0.1 °C under a constant 12:12 h light-dark cycle. The predator species chosen for this experiment were ‘daddy long-legs’ spiders, Pholcus phalangioides. The spiders were wild caught from the LIMS2 building at La Trobe University. The species groups used in this experiment included D. melanogaster from a single species cage (Cmel4), D. melanogasterfrom a competition cage (Tmel40), D. hydei from a single species cage (Chyd20), and D. melanogaster from a competition cage (Thyd40). The competition groups were taken from the same founding cage.

Spider arenas

The two arenas were constructed using a square plastic container and a circular mesh screen barrier glued to the bottom. A spider was placed in the centre of the mesh barrier for the treatment group, and the mesh barrier was left empty for the control group. A single fly was placed into both arenas and recorded for 20 minutes. This was repeated four times for each control and treatment group.

Spider cages

8 cages were set up consisting of four control groups (no spider) and four treatment groups (spider). The cages were housed in a CT cabinet at 20 ± 1 °C. A spider was placed unrestrained in the four treatment cages.

Evidence Three - Data Collection

21025056_1 — 2024-06-25 06:43:10 UTC

Attached is a screenshot of all the arena trials that were recorded. The cage experiment did not go entirely as planned due to limitations in time as well as a flu going around the lab. I was only able to collect limited data for this section. If I had more time, I would have liked to look at the effects of the presence of a predator on the next generation. I ran four series of data collection on the arenas. 'C' in a fly group indicated the origin of the fly group was from a single species cage, and 'T' indicated it came from a competition cage of both D. melanogaster and D. hydei.

First Round of Trials: D. melanogaster 1st gen

Sixteen 20 minute trials were conducted and video recorded, eight per each group. The two fly groups used were TMel4 and CMel40. A control arena was used with no spider, and a treatment arena with a spider. The spider was contained in a mesh barrier glued to the arena container.

Second Round of Trials: D. hydei 1st gen

Fourteen 20 minute trials were conducted and video recorded, seven per each fly group. The fly groups used for this trial was CHyd20 and THyd40.

Third Round of Trials: D. melanogaster 2nd gen

Eight 20 minute trials with a ring barrier. Two rounds for each fly group, one with a spider and one without a spider. Groups:

Tmel40S (developed with spider)
Tmel40N (developed without spider)
Cmel4S (developed with spider)
Cmel4N (developed without spider)

Fourth Round of Trials: D. melanogaster 2nd gen

Four 20 minute trials with no ring barrier, all with a spider. One video per fly group listed in third round of trials.