Just a question...

In science when we refer to the genetic condition that is representative of the vast majority of individuals we use the term 'wild type,' not normal.

A 'super' is used to denote a co-dominancy situation where both maternal and paternal alleles for a given trait are expressed concurrently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshSloane

In science when we refer to the genetic condition that is representative of the vast majority of individuals we use the term 'wild type,' not normal.

A 'super' is used to denote a co-dominancy situation where both maternal and paternal alleles for a given trait are expressed concurrently.

---

The Genetics Home Reference glossary defines "wild type allele" as "The normal, as opposed to the mutant, gene or allele" (http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=wildtypeallele). So "normal" and "wild type" are synonyms. Besides, "normal" is quicker to type. :D

In the above definition for "super", the two genes in a gene pair could be either the same or different. For example, the type A human blood type gene and the type B human blood type gene are expressed concurrently in people with the AB blood type.

IMO, a super has two copies of a codominant mutant gene in the gene pair. The mojave mutant gene is codominant to the normal gene because the three possible genotypes (2 mojave genes, 2 normal genes, and a mojave gene paired with a normal gene) produce different appearances (AKA phenotypes). A mojave morph snake has a mojave gene paired with a normal gene. A super mojave morph snake is a blue-eyed leucistic and has a gene pair made up of 2 mojave genes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulh

The Genetics Home Reference glossary defines "wild type allele" as "The normal, as opposed to the mutant, gene or allele" (http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=wildtypeallele). So "normal" and "wild type" are synonyms. Besides, "normal" is quicker to type. :D

In the above definition for "super", the two genes in a gene pair could be either the same or different. For example, the type A human blood type gene and the type B human blood type gene are expressed concurrently in people with the AB blood type.

IMO, a super has two copies of a codominant mutant gene in the gene pair. The mojave mutant gene is codominant to the normal gene because the three possible genotypes (2 mojave genes, 2 normal genes, and a mojave gene paired with a normal gene) produce different appearances (AKA phenotypes). A mojave morph snake has a mojave gene paired with a normal gene. A super mojave morph snake is a blue-eyed leucistic and has a gene pair made up of 2 mojave genes.

---

Yes the two are synonymous in some situations. I am a scientist, and if you were to use the term 'normal' to refer to a genetic condition you would be laughed out of the room. Normal is a relative term depending on the situation. Over an evolutionary timeframe, as mutations arise in a population, the mutated gene can become the predominantly inherited form of the gene. Which is why it's best to use wild type to avoid confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshSloane

Over an evolutionary timeframe, as mutations arise in a population, the mutated gene can become the predominantly inherited form of the gene. Which is why it's best to use wild type to avoid confusion.

---

It would become what is called normal, just as it would become what is called wild type. Still synonyms.

Might not want to pull the scientist card, not only is paul a scientist, hes a geneticist. Not just some internet taught like the most of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

It would become what is called normal, just as it would become what is called wild type. Still synonyms.

Might not want to pull the scientist card, not only is paul a scientist, hes a geneticist. Not just some internet taught like the most of us.

---

Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshSloane

Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.

---

I'm just saying so has paul, he just too humble most of the time to say I do this for a living.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yodawagon

Why do you list SUPER normals in your signature? You can't just make up your own genetics.:colbert::colbert::colbert::colbert::colbert::colbert::colbert::colbert ::colbert:

---

I've been wanting to ask that question for a few days now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoshSloane

Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.

---

I remember sitting in on a talk on genetics given by Paul about 15-20 years ago. It was very informative, I still remember it. Josh, you're still a student at the Anshutz Medical Campus of CU aren't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser

I'm just saying so has paul, he just too humble most of the time to say I do this for a living.

---

Well, I am retired, now.

For what it's worth, I have never claimed that I was a professional scientist or geneticist. I have stated on several forums that I have taken a University genetics course and that I have been a technician in a university genetics lab. I did get my name on a couple of genetics papers as junior author, though. And up till a few years ago, I could run snake genetics questions past one of my bosses at the lab for the real professional take.

As for using wild type vs normal, I would prefer to use wild type, too. It is more precise than "normal". But this is not a university or professional setting. IMO, jargon with a precise meaning must often give way to language that is less precise but more easily understood. YMMV.