Compared to last time, we have developed our methods of RNAi and developed a process which works for the way I want to express my experiment. Previously, I was having a hard time having consistent results but by this time around we have found a way to repeat the experiment and have consistent results. Along with this, I have learned how to make the bacteria to go on the plates, how to spot them and look at the worms under a microscope. With a trend of a large percentage of unhatched embryos with my gene of interest, we know that it must have some type of role in development. Under the microscope we looked at the adult mother worms from the RNAi plates, both the control (L440) and gene (F10C2.4) to look at physical differences. In order to do so, I used a different strain of worms. Instead of the wild type N2, I used a strain that had a GFP (green fluorescent protein) that showed the embryos and eggs in the mothers body which made it easier to see under the microscope. While looking at both types of worms, we realized that there was still something funky looking in the controls even though they showed normal progeny development. That made it difficult to compare what we saw to determine what is normal and what isn’t. This makes me realize that it is hard to have a “perfect” model to compare to which organisms are able to have mutations that may not effect the worm’s phenotype. As a result, I need to do more experiments and look at the worms under the microscope to see the physical differences. From that I can pin point the exact way I want to approach determining how this gene works.