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

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 684

0 members and 684 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,912
Threads: 249,117
Posts: 2,572,191
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, coda
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    BPnet Senior Member JoshSloane's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-16-2015
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    1,373
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 567 Times in 399 Posts
    Images: 5
    In science when we refer to the genetic condition that is representative of the vast majority of individuals we use the term 'wild type,' not normal.

    A 'super' is used to denote a co-dominancy situation where both maternal and paternal alleles for a given trait are expressed concurrently.

  2. #12
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    08-31-2011
    Posts
    649
    Thanks
    193
    Thanked 428 Times in 263 Posts
    Images: 21

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSloane View Post
    In science when we refer to the genetic condition that is representative of the vast majority of individuals we use the term 'wild type,' not normal.

    A 'super' is used to denote a co-dominancy situation where both maternal and paternal alleles for a given trait are expressed concurrently.
    The Genetics Home Reference glossary defines "wild type allele" as "The normal, as opposed to the mutant, gene or allele" (http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=wildtypeallele). So "normal" and "wild type" are synonyms. Besides, "normal" is quicker to type.

    In the above definition for "super", the two genes in a gene pair could be either the same or different. For example, the type A human blood type gene and the type B human blood type gene are expressed concurrently in people with the AB blood type.

    IMO, a super has two copies of a codominant mutant gene in the gene pair. The mojave mutant gene is codominant to the normal gene because the three possible genotypes (2 mojave genes, 2 normal genes, and a mojave gene paired with a normal gene) produce different appearances (AKA phenotypes). A mojave morph snake has a mojave gene paired with a normal gene. A super mojave morph snake is a blue-eyed leucistic and has a gene pair made up of 2 mojave genes.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to paulh For This Useful Post:

    200xth (11-17-2015)

  4. #13
    BPnet Senior Member JoshSloane's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-16-2015
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    1,373
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 567 Times in 399 Posts
    Images: 5

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by paulh View Post
    The Genetics Home Reference glossary defines "wild type allele" as "The normal, as opposed to the mutant, gene or allele" (http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=wildtypeallele). So "normal" and "wild type" are synonyms. Besides, "normal" is quicker to type.

    In the above definition for "super", the two genes in a gene pair could be either the same or different. For example, the type A human blood type gene and the type B human blood type gene are expressed concurrently in people with the AB blood type.

    IMO, a super has two copies of a codominant mutant gene in the gene pair. The mojave mutant gene is codominant to the normal gene because the three possible genotypes (2 mojave genes, 2 normal genes, and a mojave gene paired with a normal gene) produce different appearances (AKA phenotypes). A mojave morph snake has a mojave gene paired with a normal gene. A super mojave morph snake is a blue-eyed leucistic and has a gene pair made up of 2 mojave genes.
    Yes the two are synonymous in some situations. I am a scientist, and if you were to use the term 'normal' to refer to a genetic condition you would be laughed out of the room. Normal is a relative term depending on the situation. Over an evolutionary timeframe, as mutations arise in a population, the mutated gene can become the predominantly inherited form of the gene. Which is why it's best to use wild type to avoid confusion.

  5. #14
    BPnet Royalty OhhWatALoser's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-28-2007
    Location
    Suburbs of Detroit
    Posts
    4,986
    Thanks
    530
    Thanked 2,721 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Images: 2

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSloane View Post
    Over an evolutionary timeframe, as mutations arise in a population, the mutated gene can become the predominantly inherited form of the gene. Which is why it's best to use wild type to avoid confusion.
    It would become what is called normal, just as it would become what is called wild type. Still synonyms.

    Might not want to pull the scientist card, not only is paul a scientist, hes a geneticist. Not just some internet taught like the most of us.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to OhhWatALoser For This Useful Post:

    200xth (11-17-2015),dsirkle (11-17-2015),ECechoHO (11-16-2015),MarkS (11-16-2015)

  7. #15
    BPnet Senior Member JoshSloane's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-16-2015
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    1,373
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 567 Times in 399 Posts
    Images: 5

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
    It would become what is called normal, just as it would become what is called wild type. Still synonyms.

    Might not want to pull the scientist card, not only is paul a scientist, hes a geneticist. Not just some internet taught like the most of us.
    Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.

  8. #16
    BPnet Royalty OhhWatALoser's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-28-2007
    Location
    Suburbs of Detroit
    Posts
    4,986
    Thanks
    530
    Thanked 2,721 Times in 1,477 Posts
    Images: 2

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSloane View Post
    Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.
    I'm just saying so has paul, he just too humble most of the time to say I do this for a living.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to OhhWatALoser For This Useful Post:

    200xth (11-17-2015)

  10. #17
    BPnet Veteran Montypython696's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-2013
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    556
    Thanks
    213
    Thanked 226 Times in 145 Posts

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by Yodawagon View Post
    Why do you list SUPER normals in your signature? You can't just make up your own genetics.
    I've been wanting to ask that question for a few days now...
    I've got quite a few...

  11. #18
    Apprentice SPAM Janitor MarkS's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-22-2005
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    6,209
    Thanks
    1,535
    Thanked 2,678 Times in 1,596 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Images: 3

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSloane View Post
    Excuse me? I am a scientist, a neurotoxicologist. And I have worked in genomics for many years.
    I remember sitting in on a talk on genetics given by Paul about 15-20 years ago. It was very informative, I still remember it. Josh, you're still a student at the Anshutz Medical Campus of CU aren't you?
    Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

  12. #19
    BPnet Veteran
    Join Date
    08-31-2011
    Posts
    649
    Thanks
    193
    Thanked 428 Times in 263 Posts
    Images: 21

    Re: Just a question...

    Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
    I'm just saying so has paul, he just too humble most of the time to say I do this for a living.
    Well, I am retired, now.

    For what it's worth, I have never claimed that I was a professional scientist or geneticist. I have stated on several forums that I have taken a University genetics course and that I have been a technician in a university genetics lab. I did get my name on a couple of genetics papers as junior author, though. And up till a few years ago, I could run snake genetics questions past one of my bosses at the lab for the real professional take.

    As for using wild type vs normal, I would prefer to use wild type, too. It is more precise than "normal". But this is not a university or professional setting. IMO, jargon with a precise meaning must often give way to language that is less precise but more easily understood. YMMV.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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