Please Check my HW

Hi guys,

I'm slowly getting the hang of genetics and punnett squares. I'm a little confused about the coding though.

For example, this is one of the practice problems I was working on: Bumble bee + Bumble bee. (s=spider, n=noprmal, p=pastel)

-------sp------sn------pn------nn

sp----spsp----spsn----sppn----spnn

sn----snsp----snsn----snpn----snnn

pn----pnsp----pnsn----pnpn----pnnn

nn----nnsp----nnsn----nnpn----nnnn

Here's my intepretation of the codes:
spsp = Bumble(homo spider)?
snsp = bumble bee?
pnsp = bumble bee?
snsn = spider
nnsp = bumble bee?
snnn = normal het spider
pnpn = pastel
pnnn = normal het pastel
nnnn = normal

The ones marked with question marks are the ones i'm not certain of.

Does the order of the letters matter? eg. spsp = bumble, but sspp = killer

Thanks for your help :)

Close, you are getting it. However, the morphs you have (Pastel + Spider) are co-dominant morphs meaning they have no "het" form, they either present myself or they don't. As far as I know, a there is no super spider.

A Bumble x Bumble will get you:
25% Normals
25% Pastel
25% Spiders
25% Bumble Bees

As of now there is no "Super" Spider, but It is possible if you breed a bumble bee x bumble bee that you could get homozygous spiders. Meaning it would look like like any other spider, but when bred to a normal you would get 100% (heterozygous) spiders. Spider is dominant, meaning there is no "super" form, homos and hets look the same.
I have also heard that the homo spider may be lethal and the snakes do not survive, but I have no experience with that.

You square is spot on, but your interpretation is a little off.
whenever you see one p or 1 s, you have either a spider or a pastel.
When you see 2 p's that's a super pastel, so you can create Super Pastels (pnpn) and Super Pastel Spiders (spnp or spsp)

Regular bumble bee would be (spsn or snpn)

Hope this helps!

My bad. I gave you the Bumbe X Normal odds.

But yes, Corvid is right. Your square is correct, but you do need to upper or lower case the letters so that you can understand which are the represented morph. IE a Bumble is SnPn meaning that its a shows both pastel and spider genes.

Thank you guys, didn't know killer bees are possible in this combination. I thought the only way was to make a superpastel first, then breed it with a spider.

here're my new answers

spsp = killer
snsp = bumble
pnsp = Killer
snsn = spider
nnsp = bumble
snnn = Spider
pnpn = Super Pastel
pnnn = Pastel
nnnn = normal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bleepr

Close, you are getting it. However, the morphs you have (Pastel + Spider) are co-dominant morphs meaning they have no "het" form, they either present myself or they don't. As far as I know, a there is no super spider.

A Bumble x Bumble will get you:
25% Normals
25% Pastel
25% Spiders
25% Bumble Bees

---

Am I the only one who has serious issues with people saying that there is no such thing as heterozygous pastel(or any other dom/co-dom gene)?

I realize it's all semantics, but "regular pastels" ARE heterozygous pastels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmca

here're my new answers

spsp = killer
snsp = bumble
pnsp = Killer
snsn = spider
nnsp = bumble
snnn = Spider
pnpn = Super Pastel
pnnn = Pastel
nnnn = normal

---

Much better!
If you breed a spider x super pastel you get
50% Bumble bees
50% Pastels

UNLESS you happen to have one of those homo spiders, then you get 100% bumbles! :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

Am I the only one who has serious issues with people saying that there is no such thing as heterozygous pastel(or any other dom/co-dom gene)?

I realize it's all semantics, but "regular pastels" ARE heterozygous pastels.

---

I'm with you on this. I think that realizing that pastels and spiders are hets makes it much easier to predict offspring from complex crosses.

Also, I'm not sure what the latest official notation is but I like the upper and lower case letters to show that there are two different "normal" genes involved in this cross; normal for pastel and normal for spider. I would write bumblebee X bumblebee as PpSs X PpSs with the P being the pastel mutant version and p the normal for pastel version and likewise S the spider mutant and s the normal for spider.

I don't think this forum supports html tables but just in case this is how I would write the cross:


<html><table border=2><tr><td></td><td>PS</td><td>Ps</td><td>pS</td><td>ps</td>
</tr><tr><td>PS</td><td>PPSS</td><td>PPSs</td><td>PpSS</td><td>PpSs</td></tr>
<tr><td>Ps</td><td>PPSs</td><td>PPss</td><td>PpSs</td><td>Ppss</td></tr><tr><td>
pS</td><td>PpSS</td><td>PpSs</td><td>ppSS</td><td>ppSs</td></tr><tr><td>ps</td>
<td>PpSs</td><td>Ppss</td><td>ppSs</td><td>ppss</td></tr></table></html>

But I'm not at all sure any of the homozygous spider (SS) combos hatch.

I'm pretty sure that technically PpSs would be the correct way to write out a bumble bee (or maybe it would be PpSsnnllii etc..) [to show that it's not a lesser pied as well ;) ] but I think for someone who is starting to understand genetics and trying to get their head wrapped around it that it's ok to write it PnSn. Just because that gives them more of a visual that the ones that are not expressed will be normal.
It's not like when you sell your snake you have to give a huge write up about it (although I'm the type of person who would appreciate it!), so whatever helps you figure it out is the best way to do it.

I am with you 100% on pastels being heterozygous. Lesser = a Het for Blue eyed... I wish more people would acknowlege that.

Hi,

I think I've worked out how to use tables (it took me long enough :oops: ) on here - is this what you were trying to post?


If I've messed it up during the learning curve let me know and I'll try and fix it.

And here is the code to do it to save anyone else having the same problems I did;

[TABLE] |[B]PS[/B] |[B]Ps[/B] |[B]pS [/B]|[B]ps[/B]
[B]PS[/B] |PPSS |PPSs |PpSS |PpSs
[B]Ps [/B]|PPSs |PPss |PpSs |Ppss
[B]pS[/B] |PpSS |PpSs |ppSS |ppSs
[B]ps[/B] |PpSs |Ppss |ppSs |ppss[/TABLE]


dr del

Beautiful!

Thanks! I thought briefly about trying square brackets instead of <> and should have but I had no idea about the pipes. I'll change my Excel macro that generates the code and maybe experiment a bit more. It will be nice to be able to do squares on this forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

I'm with you on this. I think that realizing that pastels and spiders are hets makes it much easier to predict offspring from complex crosses.

Also, I'm not sure what the latest official notation is but I like the upper and lower case letters to show that there are two different "normal" genes involved in this cross; normal for pastel and normal for spider. I would write bumblebee X bumblebee as PpSs X PpSs with the P being the pastel mutant version and p the normal for pastel version and likewise S the spider mutant and s the normal for spider.

---

Yep, you are correct that a pastel (i.e.) is het for that mutation. It just becomes difficult when someone says "het for pastel" because that implies that two mutated alleles make a pastel. But, a pastel is a het (het for that chromatophore anomaly).
And, yes, in my career I've always done the cap/small letter (i.e., Pp) to indicate one mutated allele for (let's say) pastel and the other unmutated homologous allele (homologous roughly meaning paired or same location). So, for those who need an example, PpHh would be a pastel het for ghost (hypo), and PpHH would be a pastel ghost--you can make up your own letters. It could be helpful for some to insert "n" where there is a normal allele, but for me, it's just too busy. So Randy, Corvid, Dr. Del....good posts. I concur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenePirate

Yep, you are correct that a pastel (i.e.) is het for that mutation. It just becomes difficult when someone says "het for pastel" because that implies that two mutated alleles make a pastel. But, a pastel is a het (het for that chromatophore anomaly).
And, yes, in my career I've always done the cap/small letter (i.e., Pp) to indicate one mutated allele for (let's say) pastel and the other unmutated homologous allele (homologous roughly meaning paired or same location). So, for those who need an example, PpHh would be a pastel het for ghost (hypo), and PpHH would be a pastel ghost--you can make up your own letters. It could be helpful for some to insert "n" where there is a normal allele, but for me, it's just too busy. So Randy, Corvid, Dr. Del....good posts. I concur.

---

The way I read things, when someone says "het for x" they are referring to x as a recessive trait i.e. not visibly discernable from normal.

"Het x" (without the for) to me represents a dom/codom trait that is not a homozygous animal, though both examples could be considered correct.

To muddy things further, if referring to a codominant trait, if you use the term "heterozygous" then you should name the super form to be technically correct.

I have no issue with "het" being used with a dom/codom trait, especially when working out squares. I just make sure to slow down and read very carefully.

Clarifying questions are never a bad thing.

Just my 2 cents.

All "heterozygous" means is that two different forms of an allele exist in the same location on two different homologous chromosomes. Heterozygous animals will phenotypically express whatever is encoded by the dominant allele. Obviously, if one of the alleles codes for a recessive trait, it will not be expressed in a heterozygous animal.

And before anyone else brings this up about the lettering...Technically the small letters are used to represent recessive traits, and the cap letters are used to represent dominant traits. But, if you're into Punnett squares, do whatever is comfy.

Now that it looks like we have a completely dominant ball python mutation (pinstripe) perhaps our use of the word heterozygous will adjust a bit.

I think many snake keepers’ first exposure to "het" was with recessive mutations so they got to thinking that heterozygous meant "normal looking gene carrier". Some have since come around to the idea of a Pastel being a het so might be thinking heterozygous means "half way to some other morph" as in "Pastel is het for Super Pastel". But really heterozygous just means having an unmatched pair of genes at the locus you are talking about. Even without supers the Spiders and most all Pinstripes are still hets with one mutant gene paired with one normal gene. Perhaps we'll start seeing ads for heterozygous pinstripes (the ones sold so far) and both 100% and 33% possible homozygous pinstripes. Even though the het and homozygous pinstripe look the same understanding that a heterozygous pinstripe has one normal copy at the pinstripe locus helps you to see how it has a 50% chance of passing that normal version to an offspring while a homozygous pinstripe would always pass the pinstripe mutation.

Wait,

Can you link me to the proven homozygous pinstripe story - I missed that entirely. :oops:


dr del

I was going by a Reptile Radio interview with BHB. The archive link I found again now:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/reptile...00bNERD-vs-BHB

I don’t see where I can tell how many minutes in it is but looks roughly 2/3 of the way through. I'm not aware of proof of a homozygous pinstripe being directly published on the web by anyone yet. But just going by that last August interview sounds like 22 for 22 pinstripes. He didn’t actually say that the females where not pinstripes but he does go on to say that he doesn’t see any obvious difference between that apparent homozygous pinstripe and a normal (i.e. heterozygous) pinstripe.