on Monday, August 31st, 2020 12:54 | by Anders Eriksson
I wanted to expand and look into some general behavior of the mbon-2 flies. Mostly as a complement to the already existing data.
Test of the expression pattern of 6 Gal4 lines, while waiting for the cross to check for FoxP overlap.
on Thursday, August 27th, 2020 1:46 | by Ottavia Palazzo
- Halfway in analyzing the Buridan data altogether (not in two batches)
- Maxiprepped plasmid for making FoxP protein at the klinikum
- Writing the thesis a little bit
- bought Fas-II antibody
- data 1): FoxP-iB Heterozygous/Homozygous comparison with Stinger-GFP. This time i was cautious with everything: fly all the same age and sex, same larvae density, same number of copies of GFP
I can not detect any difference between homozygous and heterozygous mutants. I also counted cells in IMARIS and I detected no difference in number or distribution.
- data 2): FoxP-iB Heterozygous/Homozygous comparison with CD8-GFP. This time i was cautious with everything: fly all the same age and sex, same larvae density, same number of copies of GFP
I can see some differences but i do not know how to quantify/explain them. Also I am not sure if it is a problem of dissection/mounting. I am not convinced.
- data 3): nc82 staining on homo/hetero FoxP-iB. I do not see differences
Problem: I haven’t managed yet to make the FasII antibody work:
I have used a 1:10 concentration of primary antibody for one night and a 1:100 concentration of secondary antibody for 4 hours. I will ask someone
In the picture I have increased the gain a lot just to be sure. I could not see anything
on Monday, July 20th, 2020 1:38 | by Anders Eriksson
-Introduced Sayani to the wonderful world of Drosophila
-Been doing some DTS coding
-Preparing flies to do optomotor response for Mathias Raß
on Monday, July 13th, 2020 1:39 | by Anders Eriksson
on Monday, June 22nd, 2020 1:58 | by Anders Eriksson
-Added progressbar for data validation
-Updated the progress bar (see figure 1)
-Fixed bug with wrong sample size (see figure 2)
-Fixed bug with unorganized barplots (see figure 2)
Exp always to the right:
plotOMparams <- plotOMparams[order(plotOMparams$desc),]
plotOMparams$group <- factor(plotOMparams$group, levels=paste(unique(plotOMparams$group)))
progress <- c(round(l(100/(length(xml_list)))),round(flycount(100/(totalflies))))
-Finished rescreening last Thursday. Started to evaluate the new data
Optomotor platform: Ran a few more tests to confirm that the machine was still working, it is. I also adjusted the 0 line so that it is at 0, by readjusting the “zero line” screw. Looks much better now but it is still not perfectly at 0. A difference 0.1 on the computer screen translates to 100 in the evaluation chart.
Ran a few more tests to confirm that the 0 line is always at 0. Readjusted the “zero line” screw. Looks much better now. It is still not perfectly at 0 but a difference of 0.1 in the chart translates to 100 in the evaluation graph.