Hydrotaxis and Phototaxis of Terrestrial Isopods Armadillidium vulgare Abstract This experiment was conducted in order to observe the

phototaxis and hydrotaxis in Armadillidium vulgare. Six groups of ten (10) A. vulgare were each placed in a pair of connected Petri dishes. One side was covered with a black cloth, while the other side was exposed to light. They were observed for approximately ten minutes in order to record any taxis that occurred. After the phototaxic effects were observed, the isopods were observed in the same apparatus under moist and dry conditions and hydrotaxic effects were recorded. The results displayed a random distribution with no phototaxic or hydrotaxic effect. The random distribution of the A. vulgare was not expected because these results did not correlate to their natural behavior in response to dry and damp conditions in a natural environment, however the experiment failed to reject the null hypothesis, stating that A. vulgare would move toward the dark and moist environment was rejected. This hypothesis was made based on observations of A. vulgare in a natural environment; however, the experiment did not yield results that correlate to their behavior in a natural environment. Therefore more time should be given to observe the isopods undisturbed to see if the results will then correlate to behavior observed in their natural environment. Introduction In nature, scientist have observed the attractions of animals to different stimuli, such as light and water. Taxis is the movement of animals in direct response to external stimulus. Positive Taxis occurs when movement is toward the stimulus. Negative taxis occurs when movement is away

from the stimulus. Hydrotaxis is the movement of an animal or organism in response to water (Campbell et al. 1999). Phototaxis is the movement of an animal or organism in response to light (Allaby1999). For example, many insects are attracted to light or bright colors. Others animals have an affinity for damp dark places, such as A. vulgare (Smigel and Gibbs 2008). Through these observations questions have been raised, such as why is this and how do we explain these actions? Ethnology is the study of animal behavior (Campbell et al. 1999). Animal behavior is observed through a species sensory response to external stimuli, these responses are classified as either innate and or learned behavior. Innate behavior is something an organism is born with or is inherited. This behavior normally follows a fixed action pattern (Campbell et al. 1999). For example, all babies suckle. They do not have to be taught how to do this. Learned behavior, however, is not inherited but is learned over time through observation and or through positive or negative responses to external stimuli. This lab was conducted to help answer these questions about taxis of A. vulgare. A. vulgare is classified in the phylum Arthropoda, sub phylum Crustacea, class Malacostraca, order Isopoda, suborder Oniscidea (terrestrial isopods), family Armadillidiidae (Armadillidiidae can roll into a ball, as opposed to the species of family Porcellionidae (sowbugs), which cannot roll up), and genus Armadillidium. A. vulgare live in dark damp environments and feed on organic decaying matter (Frouz et al. 2008). They are most active at night. This lab was conducted in order to determine if changes in the environment would cause changes in behavior of the A. vulgare. For example, did the isopods exhibit an attraction towards the dark side of the Petri dish compared to the lighter side of the Petrie dish. If the results showed that the isopods prefer the side not exposed to light, then negative phototaxis would occur. If the isopods moved toward the side of the Petri dish with water, then positive hydrotaxis would occur. The

phototaxic null hypothesis stated that light had no effect on A. vulgare. The hydrotaxic null hypothesis stated moisture had no effect on A. vulgare. The first phototaxic alternative hypothesis stated that A. vulgare would move toward the light. The first hydrotaxic alternative hypothesis stated that A. vulgare would move toward the moisture. The second phototaxic alternative hypothesis stated that A. vulgare would move away from the light. The second hydrotaxic alternative hypothesis states that A. vulgare would move away from the moisture. Based on observations made in the natural habitat, A. vulgare prefers and dark damp or moist environment (Smigel and Gibbs 2008). Therefore I hypothesized that the A. vulgare would move toward the dark and toward the moist side of the Petri dish. Methods and Materials Two Petri dishes were cut so as to be connected at one end then glued together on a 15cm by 30cm portion of wood blocking. Six of these apparati, each containing ten A. vulgare, were used in this experiment. The open middle section allowed the isopods to move between the Petri dishes thus allowing one side to be manipulated and the other to be the control. The goal of the apparati was to simulate the testing environment. First the phototaxis experiment was conducted by placing five A. vulgare in each side of the Petri dish for a total of ten in the overall created environment. With no other variances added to either side, one Petri dish was covered with a black cloth and the other was left exposed to light. The apparatus was then left undisturbed for ten minutes. After the elapsed time, the orientation of each isopod was recorded and the data pooled for all six of the experimental environments. Second, the hydrotaxis experiment was conducted by placing a dry piece of paper towel covering the entire bottom of the Petri dish on one side of the apparatus, and a wet paper towel also covering the entire bottom of the Petri dish on the other side of the apparatus. Once again five isopods were placed on the dry side and five

were placed on the moist side of the apparatus. The apparatus was left undisturbed for ten minutes. After the elapsed time, the orientation of the isopods was recorded and pooled for all six of the experimental environments. Since the null hypothesis stated that the A. vulgare were randomly distributed in the experimental apparatus (no effect of independent variables), the chisquare was used to determine the aggregate degree to which the 'observed' frequencies differ from the expected frequencies. The alpha value was set at 0.05 with one degree of freedom. The statistical software used to analyze the data was Microsoft Excel 2007. Results Figure 1. demonstrates the actual results of the two separate experimental tests. The graph suggests that there could be significance between the wet and dry environment, however after observing the calculations in Table 1 there was no statistical significance found. Table one compares the values of the statistical tests for each experiment. The phototaxis experiment resulted in a higher number of A. vulgare found in the light side of the experimental environment than in the dark side of the experimental environment. The same was true for the hydrotaxis experiment. However X2 calculated < X2 critical.

40 35 30 25 Number of Animals 20 15 10 5 0

36 33 27 24

Wet

Dry

Dark

Light

Environmental Conditions

Figure1. Pooled Behavior responses of A. vulgare to environmental conditions simulated in each half of an experimental apparatus. (N=6 with 10 animals each)

Table 1. Observed and expected numbers of A. vulgare from hydrotaxic and phototaxic experiments with critical and calculated chi-square values (N=6 with 10 animals each) Environmental Observed number condition of animals Wet 36 Dry 24 Dark 33 Light 37 Expected number of animals 30 30 30 30 Critical X2 value (df = 1, = 0.05) 3.8 3.8 Calculated X2 value 2.4 .6

Discussion In the phototaxis and hydrotaxis experiment X2 calculated < X2 critical resulting in a random distribution thus there was no difference in the two groups. Therefore the phototaxic null hypothesis failed to reject and the hydrotaxic null hypothesis failed to reject. The first and second alternative hypotheses for both experiments were rejected. In addition the hypothesis that A. vulgare would show taxis toward the dark and moist side of the Petri dish was also rejected. It was hard to determine the behavior of A. vulgare from this experimental trial. The natural environment for A. vulgare is dark and damp, however this experiment did not reflect the same behavior observed in their natural environment. Even though the recorded results state that the A. vulgare showed no affinity toward one stimulus over the other, it doesnt mean they did not react to the stimuli in another way (Haye and Ojeda 1997). Studies have shown that when the environmental stimulus are ideal that the isopods will actually grow larger and show cognitive response (Hassall et al. 2004). Since the isopods were kept in a lab with a constant supply of decaying organic material along with an ideal environment this could have altered the behavior pattern of the isopods. In addition the isopods were only observed for ten minutes. More time would be required to observe these animals to acquire more accurate data. The isopods did change their position in the environments many times, moving from one side to the other and at times chose the more favorable conditions. However when the time was up and the individual orientation was recorded the findings resulted in a random distribution.

Literature Cited Allaby M. 1999. phototaxis." A Dictionary of Zoology. Encyclopedia.com. 23 Mar. 2009 Frouz J, Lobinske R, Kalcik J, and Ali A. 2008 June. Effects of the Exotic Crustacean, Armadillidium vulgare (Isopda), and Other Macrofauna on Organic Matter Dynamics in Soil Microcosms in a Hardwood Forest in Central Florida. FLA Entomol. 91(2): 328- 331. 23 Mar. 2009 Hassall M, Helden A, Goldson A, and Grant A. 2004 27. Ecotypic differentiation and phenotypic plasticity in reproductive traits of Armadillidium vulgare (Isopoda: Oniscidea). 23 Mar. 2009 Haye PA and Ojeda FP. 1997. Metabolic and behavioral alterations in the crab Hemigrapsus crenulatus (Milne-Edwards 1837) induced by its acanthocephalan parasite Profilicollis antarcticus (Zdzitowiecki 1985). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 228 (1997): 73-82. Smigel JT, Gibbs AG. 2008.Conglobation in the pill bug, Armadillidium vulgare, as a water conservation mechanism. Journal of Insect Science. 8(44): 20-33. Campbell NA, JB Reece, and LG Mitchell. 1999. Biology, 5th Edition. Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company, Inc. Menlo Park, California. 831-938