This is where I think things get confusing (well, at least for me.) I think the term "co-dominant" is used too loosely. Might some of these patterns be a result of incomplete dominance rather than co dominance? If so, can the "dominance" of one of the alleles be so strong that the phenotype of a het could be so close to one of the homozygous phenotypes that it's difficult to tell the difference???? The classic example used for incomplete dominance is crossing a red with a white flower, where the result is a pink flower... which is obviously distinguishable from a red or white flower. But is it always that clear cut?? Can one of the F1/het flower's alleles be, let's say, 95% dominant, resulting in a flower very similar to either the red or white phenotype?

Great discussion.

Thanks,
Ed


>>That is exactly what I'm saying. You cannot have a Wild Type/Normal Looking Phenotypical Boa that is "Het. for XXX Pattern Morph", in the case of a Co-dominant Pattern Morph, can you?
>>jsc
>>-----
>>"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
>>John Crickmer

[ Show Entire Thread ]