The reaction is not optimal, but it looks like there are some double positive cells, and this indicate that some neurons could be motorneurons. To identify a % more and better reactions should be done

Entire larva:

FoxP-KO

WT (from random papers)

This post shows the latest day of testing and its results.

Manual Testing:

All with small hooks:

All with big hooks:

All on front of plarform:

All on back of platform:

-> big hooks and front of platform seem like promising factors, let’s pool them!

Front and big hooks:

Front and small hooks (worse):

last problem: If compared to manual stimulation, opposite signals are found. Wrong manual stimulation?

FoxP-KO: the homozigous FoxP-KO (with NO Gal4 and NO GFP) had a green signal, it means that the dsRed gives problems. I thus removed it. Also, in really nice dissections, I don´t see the phenotype I was seeing before. The brain looks fairly normal. it could than be that i wasn´t disecting well enough

The following Link shows the results of the latest tests with Wildtype flys, evaluated with the latest version of the HTML_DTS_project.R programm.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xNYvqD-wSggNl-ENkA034vVybLiv3wGj

The histograms unfortunately show very little difference between the state of left turning arena and right turning arena.

MB057B

MB077B

This picture shows all of the positive clones in the ELISA from the 1st screen

While this picture shows just the clones that have a high response for the peptide the mice where injected with, a low response for any other random peptide, and furthermore a low response for BSA

I add another animal to the count (so now n=5) and the standard deviation increased. Since I used a very young fly it could be that the cell number is age dependent. But since it can be also individual differences, after San Diego I will make an age related analysis

Latest Tests:

D1

D2

D3

XML Constructor:

What else should be integrated?

Here´s  a picture of a WTB fly and a foxP-KO-homozigous. I dissected all together and I did not know which one was which. But I manage to recognize them, which means that they are well recognizable. Just to be sure i will do that another time. (Also in order to have better dissections).

The distance between the two “hemispheres” in the WTB has an average of 5,4 um (n=3)

The distance between the two “hemispheres” in the KO has an average of  32,2 um (n=2)

The length of the protocerebral bridge in the WTB has an average of 95,7 um (n=3)

The the protocerebral bridge in the KO has an average of  140,3 um (n=2)