The definition of "co-dominant",it more closely fits the definition of "dominant",because there is no clear definative visual distinction between het. & homo.that can be regarded as consistant within a reasonable degree of variance,or,reliability.every single genetic trait produces a heterozygous & a homozygous representation in its expression. this applies to dominant traits as well as recessive ones,and,includes what we call "hypos" in boas.(It's interesting to note that in all other species of animals that I'm aware of,in which genetic hypomelanism has been isolated & proven,it is always recessive? it is usually manifested like an incomplete form of albinism,and,looks nothing like what we see in salmon & orange-tail boas.)anyway,Punnett's Square was invented by human beings,if it didn't have any relavence,we wouldn't use it,it is a way to calculate the probable outcome once we know the transmissive nature of the trait we are testing.the reason that we somtimes get numbers that don't match our P.square calculations,has to do with statistical odds.If we breed a heterozygous albino to a non-gene carrier,and,use the square to calculate the outcome,we see that the entire litter has a 50% possibility of inheriting the trait,this doesn't mean that if you get a litter of 30,that 15 are guaranteed to be hets,it's just a calculation based on how we understand the trait to work...we don't say "My het. for albino is co-dominant,because it results in a 50/50 split when bred to a normal." ,we already know that the trait is recessive! when we refer to co-dominant & dominant forms of "hypos"and,the trait proves itself though breeding results to be dominant,we are using two different genetic lables to describe two forms of a single mutation,which is just plain old "wrong",doesn't matter if you refuse to call an F1 hypo a het,or,not..."a co-dom" is still incorrect,just like it would be to call a het albino a "co-dom",or,insist that the color "green" is really just blue with the yellow removed...

[ Show Entire Thread ]