Proof on the Spider gene. OWAL take a look

[OhhWatALoser]

My theory still stands that there is something going on with the spiders that only allows one spider gene to be present in one animal. There has to be some reason that no offspring from the spider x spider breedings produced 100% spiders. Maybe it is linked to the wobble... Think about it the wobble exists in every spider and that would have to be a genetic defect which is just on the surface. I am no genetics expert but maybe nothing can attach to the same locus as the spider gene leaving the gene incomplete. An example would be with the pastel, a pastel on the location in the DNA strand has one pastel gene and one normal gene, the spider may only have the one spider gene and no normal gene so in offspring it passes spider or nothing . It makes sense to me because of the wobble being present in all spiders which would indicate some sort of genetic fault that causes it. Just a thought I could be way off base and don't know if that is even possible. But one thing is for sure in my eyes there is no super spider at all and it is NOT lethal to do the breedings of spider x spider. Now can we put those 2 things to rest and cover possibilities of what could be going on with the spider gene that causes it to have the wobble and not have a super form? Also how do we classify this gene now? It can not be dominant, co-dominant, or recessive so what could it be now?

The most puzzling aspect of this is the 78% spider result from spider X spider breedings. It suggests that the Homozygous spiders are there--you would expect, 50% spider, 25% homo spider, and 25% normal, right? You get 78% spider, and you figure 1/3 of those must surely be homozygous. But, they didn't prove to be homozygous in breedings.

How are what should be homozygous spiders winding up with a normal gene???

It's almost as though there's no pair there--just either the spider gene is present, or the normal gene is present, but there's no second gene to make a pair. Is that possible?

If there is only one copy of the gene present in the snake's genome instead of 2, then the gene could still be called incomplete dominant, even though there's no way to create a super form, I would think.

I don't think it would have a classification we are used to, dominant, co-dom/in-com dom, and recessive are all based off of the phenotype in heterozygous and homozygous form. If there is only one copy of the gene present in the genome, i think it would be called haploid (just went googling for the term 2 minutes ago). someone please correct me if there is a better term.

Either that or we have a mystery force at work saying only one spider at a time, but I searched for something related to this before and came up empty handed.

say spider and spider get pair up and one spider gene for unknown reason is able to remove the other. we are left with a spider and empty space (yes back to he null theory). it would still pass the spider gene, or nothing and since we don't know of any other gene on the the spider locus, the empty spot would also act as normal, since it can only be paired up with a normal or spider gene. so you would still get the 75% 25% odds, and everything looking typical on the outside. I guess my point is, we don't need a normal gene present.

I still can't figure out if it is a haploid situation, how could it be inherited with the 75% odds? I mean the W chromosome in snakes is haploid, but that what makes them female and we know its not sex linked and we would be looking at 50% odds. If it's not paired with something else like Z and W and is a stand alone thing, I would assume breeding spider to spider would make 100% odds. I cant really think of a way to come up with the 75%.

I need to do more reading., those are my thoughts for now