Leeuwenhoek Article

Anton van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723)
  . . . my work, which I’ve done for a long time, was not pursued in order to gain the praise I now enjoy, but chiefly from a craving after knowledge, which I notice resides in me more than in most other men. And therewithal, whenever I found out anything remarkable, I have thought it my duty to put down my discovery on paper, so that all ingenious people might be informed thereof.

Anton van Leeuwenhoek. Letter of June 12, 1716

Anton van Leeuwenhoek was an unlikely scientist. A tradesman of Delft, Holland, he came from a family of tradesmen, had no fortune, received no higher education or university degrees, and knew no languages other than his native Dutch. This would have been enough to exclude him from the scientific community of his time completely. Yet with skill, diligence, an endless curiosity, and an open mind free of the scientific dogma of his day, Leeuwenhoek succeeded in making some of the most important discoveries in the history of biology. It was he who discovered bacteria, free-living and parasitic microscopic protists, sperm cells, blood cells, microscopic nematodes and rotifers, and much more. His researches, which were widely circulated, opened up an entire world of microscopic life to the awareness of scientists.

Leeuwenhoek was born in Delft on October 24, 1632. (His last name, incidentally, often is quite troublesome to non-Dutch speakers: “layu-wen-hook” is a passable English approximation.) His father was a basket-maker, while his mother’s family were brewers. Anton was educated as a child in a school in the town of Warmond, then lived with his uncle at Benthuizen; in 1648 he was apprenticed in a linen-draper’s shop. Around 1654 he returned to Delft, where he spent the rest of his life. He set himself up in business as a draper (a fabric merchant); he is also known to have worked as a surveyor, a wine assayer, and as a minor city official. In 1676 he served as the trustee of the estate of the deceased and bankrupt Jan Vermeer, the famous painter, who had had been born in the same year as Leeuwenhoek and is thought to have been a friend of his. And at some time before 1668, Anton van Leeuwenhoek learned to grind lenses, made simple microscopes, and began observing with them. He seems to have been inspired to take up microscopy by having seen a copy of Robert Hooke’s illustrated book Micrographia, which depicted Hooke’s own observations with the microscope and was very popular.

microscope Leeuwenhoek is known to have made over 500 “microscopes,” of which fewer than ten have survived to the present day. In basic design, probably all of Leeuwenhoek’s instruments — certainly all the ones that are known — were simply powerful magnifying glasses, not compound microscopes of the type used today. A drawing of one of Leeuwenhoek’s “microscopes” is shown at the left. Compared to modern microscopes, it is an extremely simple device, using only one lens, mounted in a tiny hole in the brass plate that makes up the body of the instrument. The specimen was mounted on the sharp point that sticks up in front of the lens, and its position and focus could be adjusted by turning the two screws. The entire instrument was only 3-4 inches long, and had to be held up close to the eye; it required good lighting and great patience to use.

Compound microscopes (that is, microscopes using more than one lens) had been invented around 1595, nearly forty years before Leeuwenhoek was born. Several of Leeuwenhoek’s predecessors and contemporaries, notably Robert Hooke in England and Jan Swammerdam in the Netherlands, had built compound microscopes and were making important discoveries with them. These were much more similar to the microscopes in use today. Thus, although Leeuwenhoek is sometimes called “the inventor of the microscope,” he was no such thing.

However, because of various technical difficulties in building them, early compound microscopes were not practical for magnifying objects more than about twenty or thirty times natural size. Leeuwenhoek’s skill at grinding lenses, together with his naturally acute eyesight and great care in adjusting the lighting where he worked, enabled him to build microscopes that magnified over 200 times, with clearer and brighter images than any of his colleagues could achieve. What further distinguished him was his curiosity to observe almost anything that could be placed under his lenses, and his care in describing what he saw. Although he himself could not draw well, he hired an illustrator to prepare drawings of the things he saw, to accompany his written descriptions. Most of his descriptions of microorganisms are instantly recognizable.

In 1673, Leeuwenhoek began writing letters to the newly-formed Royal Society of London, describing what he had seen with his microscopes — his first letter contained some observations on the stings of bees. For the next fifty years he corresponded with the Royal Society; his letters, written in Dutch, were translated into English or Latin and printed in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, and often reprinted separately. To give some of the flavor of his discoveries, we present extracts from his observations, together with modern pictures of the organisms that Leeuwenhoek saw.

In a letter of September 7, 1674, Leeuwenhoek described observations on lake water, including an excellent description of the green charophyte alga Spirogyra: “Passing just lately over this lake, . . . and examining this water next day, I found floating therein divers earthy particles, and some green streaks, spirally wound serpent-wise, and orderly arranged, after the manner of the copper or tin worms, which distillers use to cool their liquors as they distil over. The whole circumference of each of these streaks was about the thickness of a hair of one’s head. . . all consisted of very small green globules joined together: and there were very many small green globules as well.”

A letter dated December 25, 1702, gives descriptions of many protists, including this ciliate, Vorticella: “In structure these little animals were fashioned like a bell, and at the round opening they made such a stir, that the particles in the water thereabout were set in motion thereby. . . And though I must have seen quite 20 of these little animals on their long tails alongside one another very gently moving, with outstretched bodies and straightened-out tails; yet in an instant, as it were, they pulled their bodies and their tails together, and no sooner had they contracted their bodies and tails, than they began to stick their tails out again very leisurely, and stayed thus some time continuing their gentle motion: which sight I found mightily diverting.”

On September 17, 1683, Leeuwenhoek wrote to the Royal Society about his observations on the plaque between his own teeth, “a little white matter, which is as thick as if ‘it were batter.” He repeated these observations on two ladies (probably his own wife and daughter), and on two old men who had never cleaned their teeth in their lives. Looking at these samples with his microscope, Leeuwenhoek reported how in his own mouth: “I then most always saw, with great wonder, that in the said matter there were many very little living animalcules, very prettily a-moving. The biggest sort. . . had a very strong and swift motion, and shot through the water (or spittle) like a pike does through the water. The second sort. . . oft-times spun round like a top. . . and these were far more in number.” In the mouth of one of the old men, Leeuwenhoek found “an unbelievably great company of living animalcules, a-swimming more nimbly than any I had ever seen up to this time. The biggest sort. . . bent their body into curves in going forwards. . . Moreover, the other animalcules were in such enormous numbers, that all the water. . . seemed to be alive.” These were among the first observations on living bacteria ever recorded.

Leeuwenhoek looked at animal and plant tissues, at mineral crystals and at fossils. He was the first to see microscopic foraminifera, which he described as “little cockles. . . no bigger than a coarse sand-grain.” He discovered blood cells, and was the first to see living sperm cells of animals. He discovered microscopic animals such as nematodes and rotifers. The list of his discoveries goes on and on. Leeuwenhoek soon became famous as his letters were published and translated. In 1680 he was elected a full member of the Royal Society, joining Robert Hooke, Henry Oldenburg, Robert Boyle, Christopher Wren, and other scientific luminaries of his day — although he never attended a meeting. In 1698 he demonstrated circulation in the capillaries of an eel to Tsar Peter the Great of Russia, and he continued to receive visitors curious to see the strange things he was describing. He continued his observations until the last days of his life. After his death on August 30, 1723, the pastor of the New Church at Delft wrote to the Royal Society: . . . Anton van Leeuwenhoek considered that what is true in natural philosophy can be most fruitfully investigated by the experimental method, supported by the evidence of the senses; for which reason, by diligence and tireless labor he made with his own hand certain most excellent lenses, with the aid of which he discovered many secrets of Nature, now famous throughout the whole philosophical World.

Citation:

Ford, B. J. 1991. The Leeuwenhoek Legacy. Biopress, Bristol, and Farrand Press, London. <http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/leeuwenhoek.html>

 

Main Idea Answers

 

Main Idea Practice Answers

Main Idea

Exercise 1

1.b; 2.b

Exercise 2

1. Across the country, many states have abolished the policy of “social promotion,” even though there is no hard evidence that making children repeat a grade has a positive effect.

2. In 1932, Wallace H. Carothers developed nylon, the first synthetic fiber, which had a dramatic effect on world events.

Exercise 3

1. No nicknames for soldiers of previous generations have earned the popularity of the term GI.

2. Since her death, Frida Kahlo’s reputation has overtaken her husband’s.

Exercise 4

1. King Leopold of Belgium exploited the Congo for personal gain and all but ruined the country.

2. The invention of the CAT scan was as important a discovery as the development of X-Rays.

Inference Exercises

Exercise 1

1. Abraham Lincoln
Clue: He steered the country through civil war.
Explanation: Lots of people have big Adam’s apples, but America has had only one civil war.
2. Tina Turner
Clue: She ruled the stage but Ike ruled the roost.
Explanation: There were many popular women singers in the sixties but only one was linked to a domineering husband named Ike.

Exercise 2

Answers may vary.

1. Inference: The puppy may well have been abused by its former owners.

2. Inference: The students are going to take advantage of the substitute teacher.

Exercise 3

1. b; 2. a

Exercise 4

1. a; 2. b

Exercise 5

Answers will vary.

1. Richard the Lionhearted was not so pure of heart as some movies suggest.

2. Her romantic attachment to Clyde Barrow led Bonnie Parker into a life of crime.

Lab 7 Sample 3 Fruitflies

Drosophila Genetics

Introduction

Drosophila Melanogaster, the fruit fly, is a great organism for genetic use because it has simple food requirements, occupies little space, is hardy, completes its life cycle in 12 days, makes a large number of offspring, can be knocked out easily, and it has many types of hereditary variations that can be seen with low power microscopes. Drosophila has a small number of chromosomes, four pairs. They are easily located in the large salivary glands. The Drosophila can be obtained from many places. Research of Drosophilae has led to a lot of knowledge about many of its genes.

Many factors combine to affect the length of the Drosophila life cycle. Temperature affects the life cycle the most. At room temperature the average life cycle of the Drosophila is about 12 days. Eggs of the Drosophila are small, oval shaped, and have two filaments at one end. They are usually laid on the surface of the culture medium, and with practice, can be seen with the naked eye. After one day the eggs hatch into the larva.

The larval stage of the Drosophila eats all the time. Larvae tunnel into the culture medium when they eat. The larva will shed its skin as it increases in size. In the last of the three larval stages, the cells of the salivary glands contain giant chromosomes that can be seen under low power in a microscope.

The pupal stage. Before a larva becomes a pupa it climbs the side of the container. The last larval covering then becomes harder and darker, forming the pupal case. Through this case the later stages of metamorphosis to an adult fly can be seen. In particular, the eyes, the wings, and the legs become visible.

The adult stage. When metamorphosis is over, the adult fly emerges form the pupal case. They are fragile and light in color and their wings are not fully expanded. They get darker in about an hour. They live about a month and then die. A female refrains from mating for about 12 days after she emerges from the pupal case. After she mates her receptacles contain large amounts of sperm and she lays her eggs. Make sure that the first flies you use are virgins.

The experiment will take several weeks. You will be assigned Drosophila with well-defined mutant traits by your teacher. You will keep a close record of what happens as each of these flies mate and pass there traits off to their offspring over a few generations.

There are three types of crosses that are studied in this lab. In monohybrid crosses the mode of inheritance is determined when a single contrasting pair of characteristics is involved. In a dihybrid cross the mode of inheritance is determined when the two pairs of contrasting of characteristics are considered simultaneously. In a sex-linked cross the mode of inheritance is determined when the mutant characteristic is associated with the X chromosome.

Hypothesis

In the sex linked cross of Drosophila Melanogaster, a phenotypic ratio of 1:1 will be obtained.

Materials

The materials used in this lab are as follows: a vile of Drosophilia with c designated trait, vials containing a medium, a refrigerator, ice packs, Petri dishes, a light microscope, a vial of wild type flies, an incubator, a pencil and paper.

Methods

Begin by obtaining a vial of wild type flies. Practice immobilizing and sexing these flies. Make sure to examine the flies and determine the characteristics of their eyes, wings, bristles, and antennae. Next, these are the steps for immobilizing the flies. Hold the vial containing the flies at an angle and place it in a refrigerator for several minutes. When the flies are immobilized, place them into a small plastic Petri dish. Then place the Petri dish on top of the icepack in order to maintain the cool temperature necessary to keep flies immobilized. Use the dissecting microscope to view the flies. Make sure to top the petri dish on when viewing the flies.

You can easily distinguish male flies from females by looking for the following characteristics: males are usually smaller than the females, males have dark blunt abdomens and females have lighter pointed abdomens. The males have sex combs, which are black bristles on the uppermost joint of the forelegs. Next, get a vial containing experimental flies. Make sure to write down the number of the vial that you have. The flies you now have are the P1 generation. The females should have laid eggs. The eggs and larvae are the F1 generation. Then after there are eggs present knock out remove the adult flies from the vial. Sex the adult flies and write down any mutations. Place the flies in the morgue that contains alcohol. Make sure to label the vial with the symbols for the mating.

After about another week has passed knock out and record characteristics of the remaining F1 flies and record the results in table 7.1. Then place the six pairs of these flies in a new vial and place the remaining flies in the morgue. Label the new vial F1, and tell the cross, date and your name.

After another week has passed, remove the F1 flies and put them in the morgue. The F2 generation are the eggs and larvae in the vial. Place the vial back into the incubator. Once again, after another week has passed remove the F2 flies and record their sex and characteristics and place the results in Table 7.2. Recording a greater number of F2 flies will make your results more accurate. Try to collect at least 200 flies. In order to analyze your data you will first have to be able to be able to complete Chi-Square Analysis.

Results

Table 7.1 F1 Generation

 

Phenotype females males
Red eyes 33 0
White eyes 0 31
 

Table 7.2 F2 Generation

Phenotype Male Female
Red eyes 50 52
White eyes 56 67

 

 

1. Describe the observed mutations? In the F1 generation the males had white eyes and the females had red eyes. In the F2 generation the males and females could have had either red or white eyes.

2. Write a hypothesis which describes the mode of inheritance of the trait you studied. This is your null hypothesis ( as described in the Statistical Analysis Section). For a sex linked cross there will always be a one to one ratio of the phenotypes. In the F1 generation there will be a one to one ratio of red eyed females to the number of white eyed males. In the F2 generation there will be a one to one ratio of red eyed females to white eyed females. There will also be a one to one ratio of red eyed males to white eyed males.

3. Refer to a textbook and review Punnett squares. In the space below construct two Punnett squares to predict the expected results of both the parental and F1 crosses from your null hypothesis.

Parental cross

 

Y Xr
Xr YXr Xr Xr
Xr YXr Xr Xr

 

 

F1 cross

 

Y Xr Y XR
XR YXR XR Xr YXR XRXR
XR YXR XR Xr YXr XR Xr
Xr YXr XrXr YXr X RXr
Xr YXr XrXr YXr XRXr

 

 

4. Refer to the Punnett squares above. Record the expected ratios for the genotypes and phenotypes of the F1 and F2 in the experiment below.

 

 

Expected Genotypic Ratio Expected Phenotypic ratio
F1 1:1 1:1
F2 1:1 1:1

 

        5. Do the actual results deviate from what was expected? If so, explain how.
No my results do no deviate much from what was expected. However in the F2 generation there were 67 white females and 52 red females.

6. For the results describe your cross? My cross is a sex linked cross.


7. Are the deviations for the phenotypic ratio of the F2 generation within the limits expected by chance?
To answer this question, statistically analyze the data using the Chi-Square-Analysis. Calculate the Chi-Square for the F2 generation in the chart below. Refer to the critical values of the Chi Square distribution table to determine the P value that is associated with your statistic.

 

 

Observed Phenotypes (o) Expected (e) (o-e) (o-e)2 (o-e)2

e

67 Xr Xr 56 11 121 2.16
52 XR XR 56 -4 16 .28
50 YXR 56 -6 36 .64
56YXr 56 0 0 0
3.02

 

(a) Calculate the Chi-Square value for these data.

1. How many degrees of freedom are there? 3 degrees of freedom

2. Chi Square=2.52

3. Referring to the critical values chart what is the probability value for these data? Greater than .05 probabilities that the null hypothesis is right.

(b) According to the probability value, can you accept or reject your null hypothesis? Explain why. I can accept the null hypothesis because my Chi-Square answer is less than the critical value form the table. I have 3 degrees of freedom and my Chi- Square answer was3.0 which is less than 7.82.

        1. Why was it necessary for the females of the parental generation to be virgins? The females store sperm in their receptacles and if they were not virgins we would not be able to tell who the fathers were.

2. Why was it not necessary to isolate virgin females for the F1 cross? The females store sperm in their receptacles and if they were not virgins we would not be able to tell who the fathers were

3. Why the adult flies were removed from the vials at weeks 2 and 4? So, they are not be able to mate with the next generation.

Chi-Square Analysis

Introduction

Statistics can be used to determine if differences among groups are significant, or simply the result of predictable error. The statistical test most frequently used to determine whether data obtained experimentally provide a good fit, or approximation to the expected or theoretical data is the Chi-square test. This test can be used to determine if deviations from the expected values are due to chance alone or to comeother circumstance.

To determine if the observed data fall with in acceptable limits, a Chi-Square analysis is performed to test the validity of a null hypothesis; that there is no statistically significant difference between the observed and expected data. If the Chi-Square analysis indicates that the data vary too much from the expected 3: 1 an alternative hypothesis is accepted.

Methods

The formula for Chi-square is:

X2=E(o-e)2
E

O= observed number of individuals

e= expected number of individuals

E= the sum of the values

The (df) are determined by taking the number of possible phenotypes and subtracting one from it. If the Chi- Square answer is greater than the number from the critical values chart then the null hypothesis is incorrect. The results are said to be significant at .05. This means that only 5 % of the time you would expect to see similar data if the null hypothesis were correct. The probability can also be rejected at .001. This time it means that less than 1 % of the time would you expect to see similar data.

Results

Critical Values Chart

 

Degrees of Freedom (df)

1 2 3 4 5
.05 3.84 5.99 7.82 9.49 11.1
.01 6.64 9.21 11.3 13.2 15.1
.001 10.8 13.8 16.3 18.5 20.5

 

Practice Problem

An investigator observes that when pure-breeding long winged Drosophila are mated with pure breeding short wing flies the F1 have an intermediate wing length. When several intermediate wing length flies are allowed to interbreed the following results are obtained. 230 long wings. 510 intermediate length wings. 260 short wings.

a. What is the genotype of the F intermediate wing length flies? The genotype is Ll.

b. Write a hypothesis describing the mode of inheritance of wing length in Drosophila. There will be 333 long winged flies. 666 intermediate winged flies. There will be 33 short wing flies.

c. Complete the table

Table 7.8

 

Observed Phenotypes Expected (e) (o-e) (o-e)2 (o-e)2/ e
LL 333 -103 10609 31.86
Ll 666 -156 24336 36.54
ll 333 -73 5329 16.00

84.4

 

1. How many degrees of freedom are there? There are 2 degrees of freedom.

2. Chi-Square= 84.4

3. Referring to the critical values chart, what is the probability value for these data? Less than .001.

4. According to the probability value can you except or reject the null hypothesis? 

I can reject the null hypothesis because the Chi-square answer is greater than the critical value from the table.

Error Analysis

Results from this lab could have been affected by many things. The constant knocking out of flies could have caused some of the larvae to not hatch therefore affecting our numbers. Also, incorrectly identifying the characteristics of the flies could have also greatly affected the results received. Improper calculation of numbers could have also caused inaccurate results. Finally, some flies could have gotten stuck in the medium and could have been identified.

Conclusion

From the results of the experiment I can conclude that I received results that were close to a 1:1 ratio. The Chi- Square worked from my data was accepted at a possibility greater than .05. The null hypothesis in this case can be accepted.

BACK

 

Lab 7 Genetics of Organisms

 

Lab 7 Genetics of Organisms

Introduction:
Drosophila melanogaster, the fruit fly, is an excellent organism for genetics studies because it has simple food requirements, occupies little space, is hardy, completes its life cycle in about 12 days at room temperature, produces large numbers of offspring, can be immobilized readily for examination and sorting, and has many types of heredity variations that can be observed with low power magnification. Drosophila has a small number of chromosomes ( four pairs). These chromosomes are easily located in the large salivary gland cells.

The Life Cycle of Drosophila

  • The eggs. The eggs are small, oval shaped, and have two filaments at one end. They are usually laid on the surface of the culture medium and, with practice, can be seen with the naked eye. The eggs hatch into larvae after about a day.
  • The larval stage. The worm like larvae eats most continuously, and its black mouth parts can be seen moving back and forth even when the larvae is less distinct. Larvae tunnel through the culture medium when eating; thus channels are a good indication of a successful growth culture. The larvae molt twice as it increases in size. In the last of the three larval stages, the cells of the salivary glands contain giant chromosomes, which may be seen readily under low-power magnification after proper staining.
  • The pupal stage. When a mature larvae in a laboratory culture is about to become a pupa, it usually climbs up the side of the container or on to a paper strip provided in the culture bottle. The last larval covering becomes harder and darker, forming a pupal case.
  • The adult stage. When metamorphosis is complete, the adult flies emerge from the pupal case. They are fragile and light in color and their wings are not full expanded. These flies darken in a few hours and take on the appearance of an adult fly. They live a month or more and then die. A female does not mate for 10-12 hours after emerging from the pupa. Once she has mated, she stores a considerable quantity of sperm in receptacles and fertilized her eggs as she lays them. To ensure a controlled mating, it is necessary to use females that have not been mated (virgins).

Figure 7.1 The Life Cycle of Drosophila melanogaster

 

 

Design of the Exercise
This genetics experiment will be carried on for several weeks. Drosophila with well-defined mutant traits will be assigned to you by your teacher. You are responsible for making observations and keeping records concerning what happens as mutant traits are passed from generation to the next.

You will be assigned to study a certain mode of inheritance using particular genetic crosses of flies having one or two mutations. The modes of inheritance most commonly used are:

  • Monohybrid. In these experiments, the mode of inheritance is determined when a single contrasting pair of traits is involved.
  • Dihybrid. In these experiments, the mode of inheritance is determined when two pairs of contrasting traits are considered at the same time.
  • Sex-linked. In these experiments, the mode of inheritance is determined when the mutant characteristic is associated with the X chromosome.

Procedure:
1. Obtain a vial of wild- type flies. Practice immobilizing and sexing these flies. Examine these flies and note the characteristics of their eyes, wings, bristles, and antennae.

2. To make handling easier, immobilize the flies with fly-nap, or by twirling the vial in ice packs for several minutes. Place the immobilized flies on a piece of filter paper inside a petri dish. Place this under a dissecting microscope to view the flies.

3. Distinguish male flies from female flies by looking for the following characteristics:

a). Males are usually smaller than females.

b). Males have dark, blunt abdomens, and females have lighter, pointed abdomens.

c). Only males have sex combs. which are groups of black bristles on the upper most joint of the forelegs.

Figure 7.2: Female and Male Drosophila

 

Female

 

Male

 

 

Male with vestigial wings

 

4. Obtain a vial containing pairs of experimental flies. Record the cross number of the vial. This number will serve as a record as to which cross you obtained. These flies are the parental generation(P1) and have already mated. The female should have already laid eggs on the surface of the culture medium. The eggs represent the first filial, F1 generation and will be emerging from their pupal cases in about a week.

5. First week (today): Immobilize and remove the adult flies. Observe them carefully under the dissecting microscope. Separate the males from the females and look for the mutation(s). Note whether the mutation(s) is/are associated with the males or females. Identify the mutation(s) and give them a made up name and symbol. Record the phenotype and symbol in Table 7.1. The findings should be confirmed by your teacher.

6. Place the parents in the morgue(jar containing alcohol). Label the vial containing the eggs or larvae with the symbols for the mating. Also label the vial with your name and date. Place the vial in a warm location.

7. Second week: Begin by observing the F1 flies. Immobilize and examine all the flies. Record their sex and characteristics. Consider the conclusion s that can be drawn from these data. Place five or six pairs of F1 flies in a fresh culture bottle and the rest of the flies in the morgue. For this cross the females need not be virgins. Label the vial with the symbols , name, and date.

8. Third week: Remove the F1 flies from the vials and place them into the morgue. The F2 generation are the eggs and /or larvae in the vial. Place the vial in a warm place.

9. Fourth week: Begin removing the F2 flies. Record their sex and the presence or absence of mutation(s). The more F2 flies collected, the more reliable the data will be. You may have to collect flies over a three-or four day period. Try to collect at least 200 flies.

10. To analyze your data, you will need to learn how to use the Chi-Square Test. Go to the Statistical Analysis Section to review the technique.

 

Table 7.1: F1 Generation Data

Date _________________

Phenotype and Symbol Females Males
     
     
     
     
     
     

 

Table 7.1: F2Generation Data

Date _________________

Phenotype and Symbol Females Males
     
     
     
     
     
     

Analysis of Results:
1. Describe and name the observed mutation(s).

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

 2. Write a hypothesis which describes the mode of inheritance of the trait(s) you studied. This is your null hypothesis ( as described in the statistical analysis section).

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

 3. Refer to a textbook and review Punnett squares. In the space below, construct two Punnett squares to predict the expected results of both the parental and F1 crosses from your null hypothesis.

Parental Cross F1 Cross
f r

4. Refer to the Punnett squares above. Record the expected ratios for the genotypes and phenotypes of the F1 and F2 in the experiment below.

 

  Expected Genotypic Ratio Expected Phenotypic Ratio
F1    
F2    

5. Do the actual results deviate from what was expected? If so explain how.

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

6. From the results describe your cross: is it

Sex-linked or autosomal?_________________________

A dominant mutation or a recessive mutation? ________________________

Monohybrid or Dihybrid? ________________________

 7. Are the deviations for the phenotypic ratio of the F2 generation within the limits expected by chance? To answer this question, statistically analyze the data using the Chi-square analysis. Calculate the Chi-square statistic for the F2 generation in the chart below.

Observed Phenotypes (o) Expected (e) (o-e) (o-e)2 (o-e)2

e

         
         
         
         
      X2 =  

a). Calculate the Chi-square value for these data.

1. How many degrees of freedom are there? ___________________

2. Chi-square (X2) = __________________

3. Referring to the critical values chart, what is the probability value for these data? _____________

 

b). According to the probability value, can you accept or reject your null hypothesis? Explain why.

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Topics for Discussion:
1. Why was it necessary for the females of the parental generation to be virgin?

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

2. Why was it not necessary to isolate virgin females for the F1 cross?

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

 3. Why were the adult flies removed from the vials at weeks 2 and 4?

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________