 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by LeosAnonymous on May 03, 2003 at 22:19:00:
In Reply to: not positive, but that I didnt think they were recessive.... posted by ROI3IN on May 03, 2003 at 19:37:38:
The jungle pattern IS poly genetic...
Many may argue that it is a recessive trait, and in a way this is true. Any trait that is not "wildtype" is recessive to the wildtype trait.
Here is the kicker... jungle is not a SIMPLE recessive (as in mendelian genetics). A simple recessive trait refers to a trait controlled by one single loci. The term "het" is in reference to simple recessives. When dealing with breedings regarding a simple recessive trait a punnet square can be used to determine the expected ratios of your offspring (both phenotypic and genotypic).
Wildtype: WW
Het: Ww
Albino: ww
If I was to try and make a comparison to humans I would say that jungle is much like having blonde hair. Two parents with blonde hair have a GOOD chance to produce babies with blonde hair. If one parent has blonde hair and one has brown hair, they still have a better than average chance to produce children with blonde hair. If both parents have brown hair, their children will probably not have blonde hair, but its still possible.
Now lets take a SIMPLE recessive trait in humans... down syndrone.
If both parents have downs then ALL of the babies will have down. If one parent has down and the other is het for down (is a carrier but does not show the trait phenotypically) then half of their babies will show downs and the other half will be carriers, etc...
I appologize if any of this seemed confusing, but its very hard to type out this kind of thing.
-Ross Payan - www.LeosAnonymous.com
