Bumble Bee X double het caramel glow?

Alright I've been messing around with punnett squares and its helped a lot, but I came to a dead end. I wanted to see what bee, and double het caramel glow would make, but I couldn't figure out how to write it. Does the bee go PS, P,S,N on the one side? I know the caramel glow is CG, Cg, cG, cg, but I can't get my head around how to combine them, help!!!

Well as for the caramel glow it would be cg because its double het so neither are visual.

As for results, your results would be 25% normal, 25% Spider, 25% Pastel, 25% Bee and all would be 50% Possible Het for both Caramel Albino and Hypo (aka caramel glow). :gj:

Your square would look like this
- p p s s C c G g
P
p
S
s
c
c
g
g

P = pastel
S = Spider
C = Het Caramel
G = Het ghost

p,s,c,g = normal

woah woah woah....

I don't understand this. I don't get how to write it out. for example the top of the punnett would read CG,Cg,cG,cg

and....

the side would read what for the bumble bee?

http://www.changbioscience.com/genetics/punnett.html

The top would read

PpSsccgg = Bee

The side would read

ppssCcGg = double het caramel glow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin_Hornby

Your square would look like this
- p p s s C c G g
P
p
S
s
c
c
g
g

P = pastel
S = Spider
C = Het Caramel
G = Het ghost

p,s,c,g = normal

---

Thats not right for a double het caramel glow...? Double het caramel glow is CG,Cg,cG,cg. Im not trying to say an actual caramel glow, just a double het.

why are there p's on the side with the caramel glow?

Ya that is why there is only 1 big letter. You have to remember you are working with 4 genes in that combination and each has a possible of 2 capitol letters. Small letters = normal. So 1 big C 1 little c = het caramel Cc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsmalex97

why are there p's on the side with the caramel glow?

---

To show that the pastel gene on that side is normal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsmalex97

Thats not right for a double het caramel glow...? Double het caramel glow is CG,Cg,cG,cg. Im not trying to say an actual caramel glow, just a double het.

---

Your square will read like this:

-- CG Cg cG cg
PS
Ps
pS
ps

:gj:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin_Hornby

To show that the pastel gene on that side is normal.

---

You don't put the Caramel Glow genes on the side of the bumblebee. The sides of the punnett square are the parents.... not the outcomes.

So one side will be the genes of the BumbleBee and the other the Caramel Glow

listen I'm reading this right out of the keven mccurley book and he writes it out CG,Cg,cG,cg so I don't understand why you write it different. I'm sorry that I'm stupid with this, but there seems to be different ways of figureing it out and I'm getting EXTREMELY confused. But not for anything I think Kevin has it right and seems to make sense. I just don't get how to represent this bumblebee!!! Someone make sense of this in a non-confusing way please lol!

Yes, but the side with the Bumblebee has a small cc representing the alaea (sp) of caramel

How about thinking of it this way. A letter represents an alaea (sp). A capitol letter represents the gene being present where a small letter represents it being normal. So on a breeding it could look like this

llaaccppSs and that would be a spider

l = lesser
a = albino
c = caramel
p = pastel
s = spider

http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...ad.php?t=52847 check out this thread, may make it easier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo Serpent

Your square will read like this:

-- CG Cg cG cg
PS
Ps
pS
ps

:gj:

---

So your outcome will be:

PSCG PSCg PScG PScg
PsCG PsCg PscG Pscg
pSCG pSCg pScG pScg
psCG psCg pscG pscg

PSCG = Normal
PSCg = Normal Het Hypo
PScG = Normal Het Caramel
PScg = Normal Het Caramel glow
PsCG = Spider
PsCg = Spider Het Hypo
PscG = Spider Het Caramel
Pscg = Spider Het Caramel glow
pSCG = Pastel
pSCg = Pastel Het Hypo
pScG = Pastel Het Caramel
pScg = Pastel Het Caramel glow
psCG = Bumblebee
psCg = Bumblebee Het Hypo
pscG = Bumblebee Het Caramel
pscg = Bumblebee Het Caramel glow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo Serpent

Your square will read like this:

-- CG Cg cG cg
PS
Ps
pS
ps

:gj:

---

ahhh this makes some sense, thank you turbo serpant!!

now

PS=actual Bee
Ps=Pastel carrying spider gene?
pS=Spider carrying pastel gene
ps=normal?

But co-doms don't carry genes right? Only recessives can hold other genes like the double hets for example. Theres no pastel carrying a hidden gene right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin_Hornby

Yes, but the side with the Bumblebee has a small cc representing the alaea (sp) of caramel

---

Nope. There is no caramel ont he side of the bumblebee. Because the bumble bee is not mixed with the Caramel until after the punnett square.

Bee is on the top, het caramel glow on the bottom. You can set up your square like this:

.........PScg Pscg pScg pscg
psCg
pscg
psCG
pscG

However, don't make things more complicated than they are. The bee has NO chance of throwing a caramel or ghost gene, so take those out of the mix. Similarly, the double het CG has NO chance of contributing a pastel or spider gene, so take those out of the mix. Only consider what your breeders can contribute, then assume the rest. You will wind up with this:

......PS Ps pS ps
Cg
cg
CG
cG

So, you can get equal chances of a bee het for caramel, pastel het for caramel, spider het for caramel, het caramel, bee, pastel, spider, normal, double het CG bee, double het CG pastel, double het CG spider, double het CG, bee het for ghost, pastel het for ghost, spider het for ghost, or het ghost. Each possibility is 1 in 16.

But, you'll have no idea which are going to be the CG single or double hets. Good luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo Serpent

Nope. There is no caramel ont he side of the bumblebee. Because the bumble bee is not mixed with the Caramel until after the punnett square.

---

That is why the letters are small to represent normal. But they are present because the alaea (sp) is there

There are lots of different ways of doing punnett squares, and all of them (at least all of the correct ones!) will yield the same results.

One thing that seems to be confusing you is that in the examples given, a capitol letter indicates the mutant gene, while a small letter indicates a normal gene. Therefore, Pp is a pastel (one mutant gene), pp is a normal, and PP would be a super pastel (although there is no possibility of getting that in your original question).

I could go through and solve the question using my method, but that would probably only further confuse you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsmalex97

ahhh this makes some sense, thank you turbo serpant!!

now

PS=actual Bee
Ps=Pastel carrying spider gene?
pS=Spider carrying pastel gene
ps=normal?

But co-doms don't carry genes right? Only recessives can hold other genes like the double hets for example. Theres no pastel carrying a hidden gene right?

---

Recessive Heterozygous is a non visual gene so it carries the gene but without proof visually. The visual is the Homozygous form. :gj:

Co-Dom/Dom Heterozygous and Homozygous are visual. Co-Dom the Heterozygous and Homozygous forms are visually different while the Dominant both Heterozygous and Homozygous appear the same, only breeding will tell if you have Het or Homo. :gj:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin_Hornby

That is why the letters are small to represent normal. But they are present because the alaea (sp) is there

---

Well then in that case you need to list every single dormant allele in existance.

When doing a punnett you only list the genes of the parents. No listing of dormant genes for simplicity reasons. :gj:

I actually find it makes more sense to me if I list all the genes that are involved on both sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenePirate

However, don't make things more complicated than they are. The bee has NO chance of throwing a caramel or ghost gene, so take those out of the mix. Similarly, the double het CG has NO chance of contributing a pastel or spider gene, so take those out of the mix. Only consider what your breeders can contribute, then assume the rest. You will wind up with this:

......PS Ps pS ps
Cg
cg
CG
cG

---

Exactly my point! Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

There are lots of different ways of doing punnett squares, and all of them (at least all of the correct ones!) will yield the same results.

One thing that seems to be confusing you is that in the examples given, a capitol letter indicates the mutant gene, while a small letter indicates a normal gene. Therefore, Pp is a pastel (one mutant gene), pp is a normal, and PP would be a super pastel (although there is no possibility of getting that in your original question).

I could go through and solve the question using my method, but that would probably only further confuse you.

---

Everywhere I have read the mutant (recessive) gene is lower case. Because Normal (dominant) is upper case... but as long as you know what you are reading it shouldnt matter I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

One thing that seems to be confusing you is that in the examples given, a capitol letter indicates the mutant gene, while a small letter indicates a normal gene. Therefore, Pp is a pastel (one mutant gene), pp is a normal, and PP would be a super pastel (although there is no possibility of getting that in your original question).

I could go through and solve the question using my method, but that would probably only further confuse you.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that you're talking about dominant always being represented by a capital and recessive always being lower case. Yeah, if anyone works in real Science, then that is the case--always. However, I think it makes it easier for everyone if the recessive gene (or mutant gene) of interest is capitalized, even though it's technically incorrect, and would, as you suggested, confuse everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo Serpent

Well then in that case you need to list every single dormant allele in existance.

When doing a punnett you only list the genes of the parents. No listing of dormant genes for simplicity reasons. :gj:

---

When I was a bio major in college, I was taught to do punnett squares that made matching pairs. For example, if we are breeding an albino x spider, you would list AAss for the albino, and aaSs for the spider. You can skip pastel, because it doesn't come into play at all. That way the offspring show up as AaSs or Aass rather than AS or As, which could make it look like the albino and spider genes are paired on the same allele, even though they aren't.

I've found it easier to drop out the genes you have termed "dormant" (I'd argue the correctness of that term, but it doesn't really matter). As long as the person doing the punnett square understand that those genes are there, and they just aren't bothering to write it down, they'll probably be fine. However, someone who is struggling to understand it, or is just in the habit of doing it the more formal way, might get confused if they try to skip that step.

As long as it is done correctly, either way will yield the same results, so both showing them and not showing them can be considered correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

When I was a bio major in college, I was taught to do punnett squares that made matching pairs. For example, if we are breeding an albino x spider, you would list AAss for the albino, and aaSs for the spider. You can skip pastel, because it doesn't come into play at all. That way the offspring show up as AaSs or Aass rather than AS or As, which could make it look like the albino and spider genes are paired on the same allele, even though they aren't.

---

The way I was saying to do it would not yield AS or As, but rather AaSs and Aass like you said. :gj:

phew...

so this kind of pairing is actually kind of stupid in reality cuz there is no chance of it throwing a visual mutation. SO pretty much in a nutshell there is no way to combine recessive with 2 gene types, and a codom/dom mix and make a visual change right?


BUT!!!

If you took a double het(caramel glow) and bred it to a pastel lesser would that throw a mutation being that it two codom mixed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo Serpent

Everywhere I have read the mutant (recessive) gene is lower case. Because Normal (dominant) is upper case... but as long as you know what you are reading it shouldnt matter I guess.

---

As I said in my first post "in the examples given", although when I looked back a little bit closer, I see that only Kevin Hornby had stated he was doing it that way. So sorry if that confused you.

I believe "real" scientists used capitol letters for dominant, and lower case for recessive, but it has been a few years so I'm not totally sure.

Be careful with labeling normal as dominant. A normal gene on the albino locus is dominant, but a normal gene on the pinstripe locus is recessive.

And yes, the bottom line is that as long as people know what letters represent what, they should be fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenePirate

Bee is on the top, het caramel glow on the bottom. You can set up your square like this:

.........PScg Pscg pScg pscg
psCg
pscg
psCG
pscG

However, don't make things more complicated than they are. The bee has NO chance of throwing a caramel or ghost gene, so take those out of the mix. Similarly, the double het CG has NO chance of contributing a pastel or spider gene, so take those out of the mix. Only consider what your breeders can contribute, then assume the rest. You will wind up with this:

......PS Ps pS ps
Cg
cg
CG
cG

So, you can get equal chances of a bee het for caramel, pastel het for caramel, spider het for caramel, het caramel, bee, pastel, spider, normal, double het CG bee, double het CG pastel, double het CG spider, double het CG, bee het for ghost, pastel het for ghost, spider het for ghost, or het ghost. Each possibility is 1 in 16.

But, you'll have no idea which are going to be the CG single or double hets. Good luck.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin_Hornby

I actually find it makes more sense to me if I list all the genes that are involved on both sides.

---

I agree with Kevin. If you fill out the punnett square:
.........PScg Pscg pScg pscg
psCg
pscg
psCG
pscG

each outcome will show BOTH allels for each gene. If you write it this way:
......PS Ps pS ps
Cg
cg
CG
cG

you only have a single allel for each gene, which isn't an effective way of figuring it out. You won't necessarily know the genotype or phenotype of a given outcome from a cross if you aren't showing both allels. The other way of writing out the punnett square (above) seems much more consistent and relevant.



Another way of thinking about it is to just use what you know. A double het Caramel Glow x normal (since there are no caramel or hypo genes from the other parent) will yield Normals, Het Hypos, Het Caramels, and Double Het Caramel Glow. Since they will all appear normal, they will all be labled as 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow). A Bee x normal paring will statistically yield 25% Bees, 25% Spiders, 25% Pastels, and 25% Normals. So with a Bee x DH Caramel Glow clutch, just combine the odds. Statistically, you'll get 25% Bees, 25% Spiders, 25% Pastels, and 25% Normals, all of which will be 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow). Since you can tell the difference between Bees, Spiders, Pastels, and Normals, you'll know what you have when you hatch them out.

Bees 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow)
Spiders 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow)
Pastels 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow)
Normals 50% Possible Double Het for Hypo and Caramel (Caramel Glow)


Just my way of looking at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

For example, if we are breeding an albino x spider, you would list AAss for the albino, and aaSs for the spider. You can skip pastel, because it doesn't come into play at all. That way the offspring show up as AaSs or Aass rather than AS or As, which could make it look like the albino and spider genes are paired on the same allele, even though they aren't.
.

---

Be careful; this might confuse people. Each parent can only contribute one allele of the homologous allele pair that they have. So AAss can only contribute As. That's it. aaSs can contribute either aS or as--equal odds. So you will have offspring that are either AaSs or Aass. If that's what you meant, then you hit it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsmalex97

phew...

so this kind of pairing is actually kind of stupid in reality cuz there is no chance of it throwing a visual mutation. SO pretty much in a nutshell there is no way to combine recessive with 2 gene types, and a codom/dom mix and make a visual change right?


BUT!!!

If you took a double het(caramel glow) and bred it to a pastel lesser would that throw a mutation being that it two codom mixed?

---

You are right that the pairing would not produce a visual morph (other than pastel, spider, or bumblebee). And neither would double het caramel glow x pastel lesser. That is actually the exact same problem as the first one you proposed (2 codom combo x double het). However, if you take the offspring from either of those pairings, and either pair them together, or back with the double het parent, then you have a chance of getting offspring that are visual for one or both of the recessive traits, as well as one or both of the codom traits. So 1st generation of that pairing might seem "useless", but 2nd generation could produce a 4 gene combo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsmalex97

phew...

so this kind of pairing is actually kind of stupid in reality cuz there is no chance of it throwing a visual mutation. SO pretty much in a nutshell there is no way to combine recessive with 2 gene types, and a codom/dom mix and make a visual change right?


BUT!!!

If you took a double het(caramel glow) and bred it to a pastel lesser would that throw a mutation being that it two codom mixed?

---

No matter what, a double het recessive mixed with co-dom will not yield caramel glow, you need to breed 2 double hets or co-doms that also carry the double het in order to have a visual caramel glow.

You could breed a double het CG to a pastel fire yellowbelly lesser spider and it would still yield nothing more than 50% Possible Het Caramel glow :gj:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GenePirate

Be careful; this might confuse people. Each parent can only contribute one allele of the homologous allele pair that they have. So AAss can only contribute As. That's it. aaSs can contribute either aS or as--equal odds. So you will have offspring that are either AaSs or Aass. If that's what you meant, then you hit it.

---

Yeah, sorry, I sort of skipped a step. After you have determined that the albino parent is AAss, you would then write it in the punnett square as passing on As. Then the spider is aaSa, but can pass on either aS or as.

So yes, that's what I meant.