Genetic improbability?!

[Menhir]

If
(the amel gene in a particular snake == linked to something that causes the egg/sperm to have problems) || (other cause of inequality == True)
{
odds != 0.5;
}

Abso-****ing-lutely. But how can this be considered?

I justed wanted to state, that all the replys based on experiences with the gender do not change the bad odds of this clutch. Also, I wonder how often "odd" clutches are based on sperm retention or different males being in the game, but having the right genetic make-up to "hide" the true problem.

So, I would always check such clutch for all possibilities in connection with different parents than assumed. If one can be sure there are no other possibilities, speak to Murphy for future breedings.

 

[Serpwidgets]

Serp, maybe I have a new morph that is compatible with your twins, I'm also certain that the father of that clutch is a male!!!!!!!!!! What a coincidence!!

LOL, yep, I've determined through breeding trials that all of my females are het for male.

I agree with Menhir that in many of these cases looking for a second father is a good idea. But it's not always the cause, sometimes the clutches are just heavily skewed with no visible explanation.

The female who threw the 17.1 clutch also threw clutches of 15-20+ hatchlings with only 1 female for a few years... I had accepted that maybe she just has a "bad" W chromosome and will only throw 1 or 2 females at most, and then suddenly her clutch had a normal sex ratio this year.

 

[Drizzt80]

That is wrong I think.
12 males is (0.5)^12 which is 0.024%.
Having excactly 1 Amel in 17 eggs is 0,012% - and thats again only half of the chance of getting 12 males only.

Guess I wasn't going for the straight mathematical comparison in this sense. Seems just as odd/improbable to get all males (or all females for that matter) in any given clutch, but maybe there was a different father . . .

My guess is that it's the new trendy answer for genetic questions that's been popping up lately . . . it's a chimera!! :grin01:

D80

 

[janew]

Sounds like your lavender is not het for anery, it is homozygous anery.

Now that's an interesting theory, one I hadn't considered at all! He certainly looks lavender, not anery at all, and comes from two Serpenco lavenders supposedly het amel, but if anery is masked completely in this male, I guess that could be possible! I have a sibling female to him, I'll breed them together next year and see what happens. Might give me some clues!

Damn, I love it when someone makes me think outside the box! :cheers:

 

[Menhir]

Someone has to be the Nazi:

LOL, yep, I've determined through breeding trials that all of my females are het for male.

It's the males that are het. for female. :crazy02:

Now I better :sidestep:

 

[Serpwidgets]

It's the males that are het. for female. :crazy02:

Now I better :sidestep:

LOL, nope, it's reversed form the XY system: the females are ZW and the males are ZZ. :nyah: :sidestep:

 

[Menhir]

LOL, nope, it's reversed form the XY system: the females are ZW and the males are ZZ. :nyah: :sidestep:

I know it is in birds and reptiles are somehow "birds", but I didn't know that it is ZW and ZZ in reptiles also.
Man, this is like going all-in with the bullets and loosing against Queen, Nine because 8-10-Jack is on the Flop - you look pretty dumb! :grin01:

 

[Drizzt80]

Man, this is like going all-in with the bullets and loosing against Queen, Nine because 8-10-Jack is on the Flop - you look pretty dumb! :grin01:

No, you just look unlucky at the poker table in that situation . . .

D80

 

[Menhir]

No, you just look unlucky at the poker table in that situation

Pssst, be quiet - I thought I could fog the whole situation a little bit.
:grin01: