[QUOTE=that_dc5;1742714]How does that even make sense? Super Black Pastel's (which I'd consider dominant because 100% of the offspring are Black Pastels) have a defect, duck bills. Super Pastel x Super Pastel/Pastel supposedly can be born with defects....
I understand how it works just fine, I don't need help with explaining it. I understand genetics 100%. And I understand that a super pin would still look like a regular pin. Never said it would look different.... So what you're saying is you'd consider a Super Pastel co-dominant because it looks different than the Pastel? That doesn't make sense either.
You obviously don't understand gentetics 100%. A super Black pastel is not a Dominant gene it is a Homo versus the Black Pastel being a het. Making this by definition a co-dom gene, meaning that when two Hets(black pastels) breed they can produce a Super or Homo (super Black Pastel) version that looks differant then the hets. To be considered Dominant there can or can not be a super or Homo version, if there is it will look exactly as the het version does. Your analogy to super pastel vs pastel is flawed because you are comparing a co-dom homo to a co-dom het, just doesn't make sense. I think you are confusing the term dominant and homogezyneous, they are not one and the same.
Reply With Quote