Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 597

1 members and 596 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,916
Threads: 249,118
Posts: 2,572,201
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, Wilson1885
Results 1 to 10 of 73

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Registered User Krynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-10-2011
    Location
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    Posts
    105
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 39 Times in 30 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixGate View Post
    Nope,
    not misleading at all. Every species behaves slightly differently,
    genetics wise. Reptiles especially since they are not all that
    closely related to mammals, which are our best model for why
    inbreeding is bad. For example, all currently living cheetahs are
    very interbred due to a natural bottleneck their species suffered
    recently.
    There are species who are resilient to inbreeding such as the naked mole rat. This has not been demonstrated for ball pythons. There has however, been many examples of inbreeding depression in both reptiles and amphibians. If you have have a good source that suggests otherwise, I would be very interested.


    Not
    true. A genetic mutation comes in three different forms, positive,
    negative and NEUTRAL. Neutral mutations are slight differences in a
    gene sequence that have absolutely no effect on the organism. These
    happen more often than you might think.
    Completely true. These are incredibly common, but I didnt think it was relevant to the explaination.
    Last edited by Krynn; 04-10-2014 at 11:17 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1