First off, I don't think "Incomplete co-dominant" is the correct term, just simply Co-dominant.



As I understand it from many discussions on this forum over the last year or so, the simplified defination of Co-dominant:



Co-Dominant - A genetic morph where there are three distinct visual phenotypes:



1) Normal or wildtype, two normal genes for this morph.

2) Heterozygous - One normal gene and one aberent gene.

3) Homozygous - two aberent genes.



The debate comes in as to what defines the visual phenotypes. I would say there has to be a very clear distinction between the three phenotypes. Not to say it has to be big, just clearly identifiable.



I see two possibilities, If the "light bulb" affect is reliable AND is proven to be effective for a high percentage of animals (I dunno...95plus%) both to identify het and to identify non-het, then the trait could be classified as Co-dominant.



There could also be an argument that since the affect can go away with age, it cannot be classified as co-dominant.





From what I've read from these threads, I would still classify it as recessive (with a really good hint for heterozygous)



In order to prove co-dominance, breeding trials would have to be performed, both with and without marker to determine the accuracy of the marker.
-----
Thanks,



Dave Colling



www.rainbows-r-us-reptiles.com



0.1 Wife (WC)

0.2 kids (CBB)



LOL, to many snakes to list, last count:

10.22 BRB

10.15 BCI

And those are only the breeders



lots.lots.lots feeder mice and rats

[ Show Entire Thread ]