 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Contact Sales! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Chris_Harper2 on December 13, 2002 at 11:52:58:
In Reply to: Confused by the F's... posted by Chrome on December 12, 2002 at 20:19:01:
::If I were to breed a Pueblan to a Corn, the offspring produced ::would be F1 being the first generation, right?
They would be F1 "hybrids", yes.
::And now, if I bred two of the Pueblan/Corns together, these ::would be F2, correct?
If by "these" you mean the offspring of this mating, then yes.
::Ok, now if I bred one of these F2 Pueblan/Corns to a CalKing, ::would these now be F1 Pueblan/Corn//CalKing, or would they be ::F3?
The resultant offspring would be F1's in a hybrid sense but this gets a bit tricky depending on how you define hybrid. But for simplicity, yes.
::I suppose my question would be: Do the F-generations only ::follow inbreeding???
Not necessarily, but this is how the terminology is most often used. At least historically.
::And does it work the same for hybrids and pure breeds???
Yes.
Furthermore, understand that a group of animals can be called F1's in one context and F3's in another.
Let's stick with your example for now but assume that both the Cornsnake and the Pueblan Milksnake were wild-caught animals.
If they bred in captivity the "hybrid" offspring would be F1 "hybrids" but would also be F1 captive born babies.
If the hybrids then bred together the resultant offspring would be F2 hybrids and F2 captive born snakes.
But then if one of the F2 hybrids bred to a captive born California Kingsnake that was an F2 captive born animal, the resultant offspring would be F1 "hybrids" but also might be considered F3 captive born animals.
So all the full brothers and sisters from this mating would be F1's in one context and F3's in another.
I've oversimplified this a bit, but I think it answers your question(s).
