Armadillidae Vulgare (Common Pillbug) Sample #27

Sample information

Picture
Location
Collection date 05/06/2026
Captive / Cultivated? Wild-caught
Group California Academy of Mathematics and Science
Observations


The weather that day was cloudy in the morning, warmer when we took the picture. The arthropod was moving pretty slowly.

Putative identification Arthropoda Malacostraca Isopoda Armadillidae Armadillidium Armadillidium vulgare

Methods

Extraction kit Edwards Buffer
DNA extraction location Abdomen
Single or Duplex PCR Duplex Reaction
Gel electrophoresis system agarose gel electrophoresis
Buffer 1X TAE
DNA stain UV Stain
Gel images
Protocol notes

We ran a Gel Electrophoresis. However, during prep, there may have been issues with our DNA extraction or PCR (more likely due to our BLAST results). Our ladder also did not show up on the gel. We believe we should have run the gel for longer for more concrete results.
Well 1: Ladder
Well 2: Sample #16
Well 3: Sample #27 (This entry)
Well 4: Sample #29
Well 5: Positive Control
Well 6: Negative Control
Well 7: +DNA
Well 8: Water

Analysis:
Our gel had very inconclusive results because we had the same band show up for all 3 of our samples and our positive and negative controls. So we believed that the band would confirm that all of our samples were arthropods. However, since we had a duplex reaction, maybe if we had run the gel a little longer, we would have seen a second band that would tell us if any of the samples had Wolbachia, as the positive control should have had a second band, since we cannot confirm that our gel results are unreliable. Moreover, we had an anomaly in our second sample (#27), as it had a very dark band right before the band that all 5 wells had. We are still unsure what this particular band implies.

Results

Wolbachia presence Unknown
Confidence level Low
Explanation of confidence level

 

Our confidence level is very low because our gel results were very inconclusive. First of all, we had no ladder to compare the run of our samples to, so we had no idea how many base pairs the samples stopped at. Moreover, we were expecting two bands on the positive control, one for arthropod and one for Wolbachia, but all 3 of our samples and the positive and negative control had only one band. We expect that this occurred because we did not let the gel run for long enough for the second band to appear. However, we predicted that the one band that did show up for all 5 of the lanes (3 samples and 2 controls) confirmed that all of them were arthropods. Moreover, Sample 2 also had an anomaly; it had a very dark band before the common band that was predicted to be the arthropod confirmation. We are still unaware of the reason for that band’s existence. 

Wolbachia 16S sequence
Arthropod COI sequence Download AB1
Summary
Report Inappropriate Post