Sample information |
|
| Picture |
|
|---|---|
| Location | |
| Collection date | 11/05/2025 |
| Captive / Cultivated? | Wild-caught |
| Group | Coalinga High School |
| Observations |
|
| Putative identification | Arthropoda Insecta Mantodea Mantidae |
Methods |
|
| Extraction kit | DNeasy (Qiagen) |
| DNA extraction location | Partial abdomen |
| Single or Duplex PCR | Single Reaction |
| Gel electrophoresis system | MiniOne |
| Buffer | TBE |
| DNA stain | GelGreen |
| Gel images |
|
| Protocol notes | DNA Extraction: We cut the abdomen of the Mantis open to remove its insides. We crushed the innards and did not include any exoskeleton Gel Electrophoresis lanes for C01 Arthropod PCR:
Analysis: The controls are different from the expected, and we believe that it might have been from a mix-up of the vials holding the DNA. If we assume that then the rest of the result seem to have no contamination or issues. Looking at our results after that, we can assume that neither of our sample, including the Praying Mantis had Wolbachia. |
Results |
|
| Wolbachia presence | No |
| Confidence level | Medium |
| Explanation of confidence level | We don’t believe that any contamination happened in our experiment but since we do have a mistake in our results it makes us have some doubt about how confident we are in the conclusions we came up with |
| Wolbachia 16S sequence | |
| Arthropod COI sequence |
|
| Summary | The Mantidae was found to be negative for Wolbachia. |








Spider
Spider
Bee
Mosquito
Roly Poly