Re: Lesser and Piebalds crossings?
Finally, someone sees what I'm trying to get at.
I'm not, however, saying that it is absolutely recessive or absolutely dominant, just that it cannot be an allele.
Even through crossing over during Meiosis the alleles would not end up on the same strand of DNA, however if they were on different loci on the same chromosome then they could end up on the same one leaving it open that neither would pass to the offspring or both would pass to it. Thus there may have been a platty daddy gamete that just never met with an egg. Still there are a lot of other things to consider before jumping to crossing over as being the reason.
Re: Lesser and Piebalds crossings?
Stupid only being allowed to edit after a short time.
Anyway, if you trace the Butter Female's paternal genetics back and prove him back to pre-2000 without having the Daddy involved then you can prove (without any doubt) that it isn't recessive.
However in a clutch that has a non-daddy non-lesser snake and a daddy snake then you know that these cannot be alleles. As has been proven.
Don't let the genetics confuse you, this is all fairly simple and there are ways to prove one way or another. I still stand that there is a good chance her father was a het daddy and it's recessive, but I'm not going to hold on to it for dear life if someone brings proof that a snake with no genetic relation to the daddy gave birth to a daddy, that would entirely disprove it being recessive. However I will maintain that it is not an allele as current evidence shows otherwise, unless of course that isn't a butter and is a lesser :O
Re: Lesser and Piebalds crossings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Oxylepy
Stupid only being allowed to edit after a short time.
Anyway, if you trace the Butter Female's paternal genetics back and prove him back to pre-2000 without having the Daddy involved then you can prove (without any doubt) that it isn't recessive.
However in a clutch that has a non-daddy non-lesser snake and a daddy snake then you know that these cannot be alleles. As has been proven.
Don't let the genetics confuse you, this is all fairly simple and there are ways to prove one way or another. I still stand that there is a good chance her father was a het daddy and it's recessive, but I'm not going to hold on to it for dear life if someone brings proof that a snake with no genetic relation to the daddy gave birth to a daddy, that would entirely disprove it being recessive. However I will maintain that it is not an allele as current evidence shows otherwise, unless of course that isn't a butter and is a lesser :O
This is my thought, butters and lessers are obviously very closely related and as ralph pretty much the king of these morphs, he could have made a mistake or he completely proved his theory that any baby from the platty daddy was distributed either the lesser gene or the "daddy" dilute gene.
Re: Lesser and Piebalds crossings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fearless
This is my thought, butters and lessers are obviously very closely related and as ralph pretty much the king of these morphs, he could have made a mistake or he completely disproved his theory that any baby from the platty daddy was distributed either the lesser gene or the "daddy" dilute gene.
Well there is a chance that they occur on the same chromosome and that usually they are on different sides of the division, but during crossing over it could have moved to the same side as the Lesser gene leaving one chromatid as Platty Daddy and the other as Normal Normal. It's rare but it would explain it, leave it open to being Co/Dom and give a just reason for the offspring usually having 50/50 chances of either Lesser or Daddy.
But this is speculation and I've only studied a little genetics, I've a couple years left until I have to take a course in it (bio major).
Also I edited your response in my quote since it didn't make much sense before.
Re: Lesser and Piebalds crossings?
Thank you I try to re read every post I make but that one I missed
