Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 1,359

1 members and 1,358 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,934
Threads: 249,128
Posts: 2,572,278
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, LavadaCanc
  • 02-13-2013, 06:36 PM
    OhhWatALoser
    Re: Why I think we need unproven dominant
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jinx667 View Post
    Very nice. I think once we get to the .001 that should be good enough to call it homozygous.

    somewhere around 16-17 eggs puts you right there.
  • 02-14-2013, 07:07 PM
    paulh
    Re: Why I think we need unproven dominant
    I worked in a genetics lab. We had lethal recessive mutant genes and lethal codominant mutant genes. We had no lethal dominant genes.

    Lethal recessive mutant (a), normal gene (A)
    AA looks normal, lives
    Aa looks normal, lives
    aa dies

    Lethal codominant mutant (A), normal gene (a)
    AA dies
    Aa does not look normal, lives
    aa looks normal

    Lethal dominant mutant (A), normal gene (a)
    AA never produced
    Aa dies
    aa looks normal
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1