4.8 Article

Hemolymph amino acid analysis of individual Drosophila larvae

Journal

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 80, Issue 4, Pages 1201-1207

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac701785z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH 067971, R21 MH067971] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS045628, R01 NS045628-02, R01 NS045628-03, R01 NS045628-04, NS 045628, R01 NS045628-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the most widely used transgenic animal models in biology is Drosophila melanogaster, the fruit fly. Chemical information from this exceedingly small organism is usually accomplished by studying populations to attain sample volumes suitable for standard analysis methods. Ibis paper describes a direct sampling technique capable of obtaining 50-300 nL of hemolymph from individual Drosophila larvae. Hemolymph sampling performed under mineral oil and in air at 30 s intervals up to 120 s after piercing larvae revealed that the effect of evaporation on amino acid concentrations is insignificant when the sample was collected within 60 s. Qualitative and quantitative amino acid analyses of obtained hemolymph were carried out in two optimized buffer conditions by capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection after derivatizing with fluorescamine. Thirteen amino acids were identified from individual hemolymph samples of both wild-type (WT) control and the genderblind (gb) mutant larvae. The levels of glutamine, glutamate, and taurine in the gb hemolymph were significantly lower at 35%, 38%, and 57% of WT levels, respectively. The developed technique that samples only the hemolymph fluid is efficient and enables accurate organism-level chemical information while minimizing errors associated with possible sample contaminations, estimations, and effects of evaporation compared to the traditional hemolymph-sampling techniques.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available