• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

A bit confused

Wintermute

Wintermute

New member
(Apologies if this is a really stupid question)

I thought that I understood the genetics, but a recent post somewhere (may be another forum, I forget) has me all confused again.

Basically, it was said that a snow x anery pairing would not produce any snow offspring. When I do a punnett square for this pairing it looks like this:

(anery)
Anery Anery

Amel amel/anery anery/anery
(snow)
Anery anery/anery anery/anery

...leading me to think that the offspring would contain a few snows, probability permitting of course. However, it seems that I'm wrong, and now I'm really confused. :shrugs:

If anyone would be kind enough to explain where I've gone wrong, it would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Hannah
 
Sorry, my punnett square came out wrong. Basically, it shows 3/4 of the offspring would have two anery genes, and a 1/4 of them would inherit an amel and an anery gene, making them snows.
 
An anery would be carrying two copies of the wild-type gene at the amel locus. So it would be this:
Snow = amel/amel, anery/anery
Anery = Wild/Wild, anery/anery

Crossing the anery locus, you get all anery/anery, so they are anerythristic.
Crossing the amel locus, you get all Wild/amel, so they are not amelanistic.

If the anery is het amel (Wild/amel, anery/anery) then you'd get a prediction of half anerys half snows. :)
 
Ya, each locus is independent. I think maybe you were mixing anery genes in at the amel locus or something similar. :)
 
i sure can't wait much longer............hopefully one of these days i will know what was just said here. :shrugs:
 
gwb8568 said:
i sure can't wait much longer............hopefully one of these days i will know what was just said here. :shrugs:
Click to expand...

Well, I think reading through all major cornsnake pages on genetics might get you that far soon. For understanding genetics one does not need breeding experience, only the capacity to practice with the knowledge about genetics available. I think anyone who is interested can learn it.
 
Blutengel said:
Well, I think reading through all major cornsnake pages on genetics might get you that far soon. For understanding genetics one does not need breeding experience, only the capacity to practice with the knowledge about genetics available. I think anyone who is interested can learn it.
Click to expand...

thank you.........believe me, i am trying. with 3 cornsnake books and a usual regular visit to this site daily, i know more than i did. but then again i didn't know anything about biology/genetics of any sort so it will still take awhile. :)
 
Aw, silly me, I use to think most people did learn basic genetics somehow... not knowing basic genetics does make this way harder to get, I get that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top