Jeffrey Heilveil

Jeffrey Heilveil

Nov 09, 2021

Group 6 Copy 494
1

First week of benchwork complete!

Today involved labeling a LOT of tubes

I have now had a week to do some work in the lab. I pushed hard to get some samples ready to facilitate the sequencing lab for our undergraduate genetics class. On Monday and Tuesday, I extracted DNA from 74 of the individuals. Wednesday, I set up a PCR (a technique used to make lots of copies of a single region of DNA) to amplify the same gene I used in the original study. Thursday, I ran a gel to make sure things worked and purified the DNA, which I sent out, together with the samples from our genetics class, for sequencing. The company that does the sequencing works crazy hours (which is part of why I use them); UPS delivered my samples to them at 3 am (according to the email update I received) and my sequence files were in my inbox by 7 am! I got sequences back for 59 individuals and already there is interesting news!

It was really hard to pick which samples to do first, I chose to go with one new site from Minnesota, the new site from Iowa, the site from Ohio, and the site from southern Illinois. While the sites from Minnesota and Iowa had no genetic diversity at this one gene (each population had a single DNA sequence), the single sequence in those populations was identical to those in Wisconsin (across the Mississippi River) and not to eastern Missouri (on the same side of the Mississippi). Given that there is evidence of the Hudson River blocking the movement of Nigronia, I didn’t expect to see signs of crossing the Mississippi. The site in Ohio had a lot of genetic diversity and both families of sequences that I found in the original study were still present, so that’s a really good sign.

TOP: A chromatogram. This is a pictorial representation of a DNA sequence. In this type of sequencing (called Sanger sequencing), infrared dyes are bound to each type of nucleotide, so the bases are read as being different colors. BOTTOM: These are the character strings, or base sequences, from Mill Creek in Illinois. The lines are all green because the DNA sequences are all identical (and identical to the sequence from the original study).

The paragraphs above make science sound like it is on the television: fast and simple. Just to give you a better sense of what’s going on, tomorrow I’ll be starting extractions for 176 individuals. The first part of the process is labeling tubes. For each individual, I need three tubes plus a spin column. Today, “all” I and a friend did was label tubes. Five hundred twenty eight tubes, to be exact (the picture at the top of this update). That was all we did for six hours (it’s now five hours after I left the lab and my thumb is still numb). Two thirds of the tubes need information on the lids and on the sides as a backup. Now that the tubes are ready, I can do the next step: measuring head widths and isolating tissue. For each insect, I am using digital calipers to measure the head width 2-3 times to get a repeatable width. Then I remove the head and digestive tract (so we don’t get contamination from their prey), so I can take the first two thoracic segments (the ones with the legs) for the extraction. I put the parts of the body I’m not using into a tube for long-term storage (in case we need to extraction DNA again, or a student wants to study gut contents, or someone needs to verify the identification of the species) and put the thorax into a working tube for the extraction. If you want to see more about DNA extraction, here’s a link to a video I made for my population genetics class during the pandemic: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxzjqM5lIz-5SQh10DVy28AXdEaw66nLF

Getting to the next round of sequences will be slower because I’ll be using a different technique to get there, but I’ll be able to get a lot more sequences all at once (the plates that the first batch went out on can only handle 94 sequences at a time). I’ll let you know what I find out.

Thursday I’ll be hitting the last field site, putting a close to stream visits for a while.

1 comment

Join the conversation!Sign In

About This Project

Successful freshwater conservation efforts require an understanding of genetic diversity and how it changes over time, data we often lack. This study will revisit populations of the saw-combed fishfly (an environmentally sensitive aquatic insect) sampled ~20 years ago to see which populations survived, how genetic diversity has changed, and whether next-generation DNA sequencing gives us a better understanding of how this species recolonized North America after the last glacial retreat.

Blast off!

Browse Other Projects on Experiment

Related Projects

Wormfree World - Finding New Cures

Hookworms affect the lives of more than 400,000,000 men, women and children around the world. The most effective...

Viral Causes of Lung Cancer

We have special access to blood specimens collected from more than 9,000 cancer free people. These individuals...

Cannibalism in Giant Tyrannosaurs

This is the key question we hope to answer with this study. This project is to fund research into a skull...

Backer Badge Funded

Add a comment