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 ]