New Genetics Calc

[paulh]

Single gene lists all the morphs with their heterozygous and homozygous forms (besides dominant). Double gene lists all combos with 2 different genes making them up. triple gene lists combos with 3 different genes making them up and quad+ does everything else. The mojave lesser BEL is in the double gene section because it has two different morphs involved with it. I'm not quite sure how else you would want to see them organized. Lemme know what you had in mind.



The only BEL that is not identified is the Lesser and Butter BELs. The rest are. I think most people are aware that super lesser or super butters are BEL and I see no reason to differentiate between butters and lessers. So thats what I came up with.



Link I posted in at the top, clutch 76 on RDR's website, he bred a pair of platinums together. which you have 3 possibilities, referring to the calc...


The baby was not a BEL or a platinum, just a baby that looked like a heterozygous daddy gene.

I agree that the single gene list should have all the single locus morphs with their heterozygous and homozygous forms. Double gene list should have all combos with mutant genes at 2 different loci.

By definition, any gene pair with two different genes is a heterozygous gene pair. It is not limited to a gene pair containing a mutant and a normal gene. A butter//daddy gene pair is a heterozygous gene pair.

Here's what I had in mind. Make two lists of all genes at the white snake locus (lesser platinum, mojave, butter, daddy, normal, etc.). First list is for the gene that is first in the gene pair. Second list is for the gene that is second in the gene pair. Match each gene in the first list with every gene in the second list. Delete the homozygous normal gene pair and the duplicates. A butter//daddy gene pair is the same as a daddy//butter gene pair, so one of them is a duplicate and can be deleted. All of those homozygous and heterozygous gene pairs go in the single gene list. As alleles make a natural grouping, all of those gene pairs should be grouped in one spot.

I've not seen a picture of a het daddy or homozygous daddy ball python. I was under the impression that a snake with a daddy gene paired with a normal gene looked normal. If the het daddy python looks like a normal, then I'd call the daddy gene a recessive mutant gene.

[OhhWatALoser]

I agree that the single gene list should have all the single locus morphs with their heterozygous and homozygous forms. Double gene list should have all combos with mutant genes at 2 different loci.

By definition, any gene pair with two different genes is a heterozygous gene pair. It is not limited to a gene pair containing a mutant and a normal gene. A butter//daddy gene pair is a heterozygous gene pair.

While your factually correct, it's not how we talk in the snake world though. I don't even think most of this hobby even knows what a locus is. We basically just count the mutant genes. I would see any other way confusing to new comers. If enough people feel differently I could make a change.

Here's what I had in mind. Make two lists of all genes at the white snake locus (lesser platinum, mojave, butter, daddy, normal, etc.). First list is for the gene that is first in the gene pair. Second list is for the gene that is second in the gene pair. Match each gene in the first list with every gene in the second list. Delete the homozygous normal gene pair and the duplicates. A butter//daddy gene pair is the same as a daddy//butter gene pair, so one of them is a duplicate and can be deleted. All of those homozygous and heterozygous gene pairs go in the single gene list. As alleles make a natural grouping, all of those gene pairs should be grouped in one spot.

I see what your getting at, but I still feel this would be completely confusing to new comers. Maybe I could have an "advanced" option with lists of every way I can think of to organize and group things, but i figured if you're "advanced" your just going to use the classic calc anyways, It's much faster to input most of the time IMO. I might consider it in the future, but don't plan on it any time soon. thx for the input tho.

I've not seen a picture of a het daddy or homozygous daddy ball python. I was under the impression that a snake with a daddy gene paired with a normal gene looked normal. If the het daddy python looks like a normal, then I'd call the daddy gene a recessive mutant gene.

I actually went back and forth about this with myself about how to classify it. First the heterozygous daddy gene IMO has a look to it, the brighter dorsal stripe and the overall brighter color seems to be consistent. Now many normals may look like this also. So from what I've seen it does have a phenotype change in heterozygous form, just very subtle.

Now lets say the change isn't enough, I really don't think it falls into the recessive category either. Wikipedia says "In genetics, the term "recessive gene" refers to an allele that causes a phenotype (visible or detectable characteristic) that is only seen in a homozygous genotype (an organism that has two copies of the same allele) and never in a heterozygous genotype." Well if we are saying the heterozygous daddy gene doesn't have a phenotype change, nor does the homozygous form. This does not fit the definition of recessive. We have a gene that only expresses itself in the heterozygous form with conditions, I'm not really sure how to classify this.

So with that in mind, I went back to the original classification of dominant.

[OhhWatALoser]

I want to add, I guess I seem a little disapproving and I don't want to come across that way. I do appreciate your input paul. I just want to make sure at the very least the list view is noob friendly as I can make it without losing too much functionality.

[paulh]

I don't think any of the calculators are particularly friendly to newbies. They are pretty confused to start with. Someone who is advanced is going to use the calculator between his ears, anyway.

[Robyn@SYR]

I know what a Locus is.

Biblical plague.

Or something.

[OhhWatALoser]

I know what a Locus is.

Biblical plague.

Or something.

lol something like that

[OhhWatALoser]

Something I've been playing with. What do you guys think? Pos Het output

I'm still calling it experimental, but I'm pretty sure it's calculating correctly. Click it on and it will give you a more real life example of what you can produce. I mean we all know breed a het to a het and you get the following...



but more realistically It's like this, since we cannot tell the difference between the normal and hets.....


What I personally found interesting is what the odds are when looking at double hets



and triple hets.


have a whole new respect for those double recessives and that triple recessive now eh? I sure do.

It also takes into account the albino toffee complex


and homozygous dominant traits.


i still have to incorporate it into the site better, but it should be giving you the right results now. Lemme know what you think.

[OhhWatALoser]

alright got the click to copy tables working with the updated forum, added some color for the heck of it.

Male:	Spider
Female:	Pastel
Percent	Fraction	Traits
25%	1/4	Bumblebee
25%	1/4	Pastel
25%	1/4	Spider
25%	1/4	Normal
View Results Page

also I believe I got all issues with the possible het output taken care of, feel free to check it out.

Male:	Het Clown, Het Albino
Female:	Het Clown, Het Albino
Percent	Fraction	Traits
6.25%	1/16	Clown, Albino
18.75%	3/16	Albino, 66% Possible Het Clown
18.75%	3/16	Clown, 66% Possible Het Albino
56.25%	9/16	66% Possible Het Clown, 66% Possible Het Albino
View Results Page

[BallsUnlimited]

awesome man big thanks to you lemme know if you need anymore photos

[OhhWatALoser]

hey anything you want to show off, ill put it up. #1 feedback I get by far is "not enough pictures"... well send em in.