Posted by:
Paul Hollander
at Tue Mar 11 18:02:21 2008 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by Paul Hollander ]
Hi Tom, It was the responding posts in one of your threads that led me to believe that patternless is a dominant mutant gene.
I'm going to symbolize the patternless mutant gene as P and the normal alternative gene as p.
If patternless is a dominant mutant gene, then a patternless snake could have a patternless mutant gene paired with a normal gene (AKA heterozygous patternless = Pp). Or a patternless snake could have a pair of patternless mutant genes (AKA homozygous patternless = PP). A normal snake would be pp.
The possible breeding pairs with at least one patternless mutant gene in the mix are as follows:
PP x PP -->
all babies PP = patternless
PP x Pp -->
1/2 PP = patternless
1/2 Pp = patternless
PP x pp -->
All babies Pp = patternless
Pp x Pp -->
1/4 PP = patternless
2/4 Pp = patternless
1/4 pp = normal
Pp x pp -->
1/2 Pp = patternless
1/2 pp = normal
Tom, the original poster asked for the result of patternless x not patternless. You've got a pair of patternless, which is expected to produce a different fraction of patternless babies.
I'm giving the expected results for these matings, which assumes a number of things. For example, it assumes that the probabilities reflect a large number of offspring, say a couple of hundred if not a few thousand. A dozen can easily be off the expectation.
Another assumption is that a PP snake, a Pp snake, and a pp snake have an equal chance of survival. With some mutants, the PP equivalent animal has a higher chance of dieing before adulthood than a Pp or pp equivalent.
There are other assumptions that I don't have time or space to mention. If any is wrong, it would affect the proportion of patternless vs. normally blotched snakes from these matings.
By the way, Tom, if you can follow any of the early patternless babies from your mating, it would be interesting to know whether any of them are in matings that produce no normally patterned babies. It might be a PP.
A lot of this requires numbers to figure out. Got any records on the number of babies that are patternless vs. normal from that patternless x patternless mating?
Paul Hollander
[ Hide Replies ]
- Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - socerpro31, Mon Mar 10 15:24:49 2008
- RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - FL_Herps, Mon Mar 10 15:39:04 2008
- RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - jodscovry, Mon Mar 10 17:51:20 2008
- RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - socerpro31, Mon Mar 10 18:45:17 2008
- WHY? - Nokturnel Tom, Mon Mar 10 19:20:42 2008
- Right with you Tom..... - Jeremy Pierce, Mon Mar 10 20:13:21 2008
- RE: WHY? - jodscovry, Tue Mar 11 21:28:59 2008
- RE: WHY? - Atrox788, Wed Mar 12 08:58:03 2008
- RE: WHY? - jodscovry, Wed Mar 12 15:39:42 2008
- JB - Jeremy Pierce, Wed Mar 12 20:20:17 2008
- RE: JB - jodscovry, Thu Mar 13 08:44:09 2008
- more pics - jodscovry, Thu Mar 13 08:47:40 2008
- RE: JB - Jeremy Pierce, Thu Mar 13 09:28:42 2008
- RE: JB - Nokturnel Tom, Thu Mar 13 10:41:39 2008
- RE: JB - durrus, Thu Mar 13 10:57:10 2008
- RE: JB - Nokturnel Tom, Thu Mar 13 12:06:38 2008
- RE: JB - durrus, Thu Mar 13 13:13:51 2008
- Nice! - jodscovry, Thu Mar 13 15:53:18 2008
- RE: JB - Jeremy Pierce, Thu Mar 13 18:17:16 2008
- I'm still trying to understand.... - DMong, Thu Mar 13 12:42:59 2008
- RE: WHY? - Nokturnel Tom, Wed Mar 12 15:34:09 2008
- RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - Paul Hollander, Mon Mar 10 18:48:36 2008
- Just a couple of pics - UAWPrez, Tue Mar 11 00:53:55 2008
- RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - socerpro31, Thu Mar 13 19:31:54 2008
|
RE: Patternless SouthernSnow Pine. - Paul Hollander, Tue Mar 11 18:02:21 2008