Quadruple recessive outcomes

[SnakeAround]

i'm used to be able to express dominance of a trait with uppercase, which can be usefull I think. When a dominant trait is present, one knows the phenotype changes.... if you don't know which trait/gene is dominant and write down the genotypes of the offspring, one does not know the phenotypes....

 

[SnakeAround]

Exactly what I asked, Sshthisto, it is not possible I think...

 

[PtDnsr]

Slightly :-offtopic Won't necessarily help here but if you want to use the superscript notation Chuck has a site that will do it for you, http://cornguide.com/notationmaker.php - it's nice if that's how you're used to doing it.

~Katie

 

[toyah]

I've never seen anything about using a filler for 'normal' genes.

This seems to be a per-species thing ... for example, in gerbils, the gene for spotting is "Sp" (capital "S" as it's dominant). This gene has been scientifically described, like most gerbil mutations, and hence officially named. The wildtype gene hasn't been officially named at all - so, in gerbils people tend to refer to a gerbil as ++ for spotting to refer to a wild-type animal, or Sp+ to refer to the heterozygote.

In other species, such as rats, where only half of the mutations people breed with are scientifically described, it's usual to use a letter for the wild type. For example, Bu is the locus given to the Burmese gene. This is dominant, so it's given the Bu designation, and the wild type is bu, since it's recessive.

I don't see the problem with using an upper case for the dominant wild type where a locus is only known to have two alleles (the dominant wild type and a recessive mutant). Once a third allele is discovered then you are going to have to use superscripts anyway, and so the symbol for the third allele is decided by its dominance or otherwise.
Example: Rabbit, e-locus. E = wild type, e = non-extension. They are the first discovered so get the symbols with no superscripts! But there is also Es (steel), and ej (Japanese brindling) - should both have superscripts. Even with no knowledge of rabbit genetics, it's easy enough for me to see that steel is probably dominant over non-extension and japanese brindling.

Motley het opal stripe- msAaLl

Amel motley het lav stripe- aamsLl

What confuses me here is the use of "m" for motley and "s" for stripe. Assuming they are on the same locus, then they should start with the same letter and further mutations be identified by their superscripts. Motley was discovered first, so logically surely it would be M (non-motley wild type), m (motley), or m^s (stripe)?

 

[SnakeAround]

I don't see the problem with using an upper case for the dominant wild type where a locus is only known to have two alleles (the dominant wild type and a recessive mutant). Once a third allele is discovered then you are going to have to use superscripts anyway, and so the symbol for the third allele is decided by its dominance or otherwise.
Example: Rabbit, e-locus. E = wild type, e = non-extension. They are the first discovered so get the symbols with no superscripts! But there is also Es (steel), and ej (Japanese brindling) - should both have superscripts. Even with no knowledge of rabbit genetics, it's easy enough for me to see that steel is probably dominant over non-extension and japanese brindling.

My problem is not using uppercase for indicating wildtype, my problem is using uppercase for indicating dominance. In the system I prefer, with using W or w for wild type (dominant), a boa het for hypo (dominant) would be wH, indicating that the boa is het by using a w for one allele and showing the dominance of hypo by using uppercase H. non dominant hypo in rat snakes would be hW. Homo dominant hypo would be HH and homo recessive hypo woudl be hh. Codominant ultramel would be UM. Stripe and mot in a pair would be sM, if motley would officially be considered dominant over stripe. To me, this system works perfectly, without using superscript.

In the AaLl system, dominant hypo cannot be expressed as HH, cause it would indicate 2 wild type genes. That is what i'm trying to make clear all the time. Superscript is necessary then, but I like to avoid that since that is mor complicated I think.

Of course one could use the same letter for the same locus all the time too with 'my' system. Motley stripe would be mMms then, homo striped would be msms and homo motley woudl be mmmm. Het striped would be mWms .... but to me that makes it too complicated. To me mW describes the genes on that locus perfectly, and from the m in it I know the name of the locus.

I do see the flaw that one time uppercase means; 'dominant to wild type' and in case of striped/motley with motley being dominant over striped (Ms) it means 'dominant over striped'. but, when a snake is only het for motley or striped, (Ws or Wm) or is homo for one of them (mm or ss) one sees that they are not dominant over wildtype. The general 'rule' would have to be; any gene tha tis dominant in general, has to be uppercased when homo. So WW for wild type and in boa's HH for homo hypo. But since nobody puts a loci in the genotype which has no morph genes on it, the discussion if homo wildtype should be ww or WW, and how you know the name of the locus in that case, is not even necessary. Ok, maybe in Punnet squares with homo wild type, but not when describing genotypes in general. Adn yes, in a Punnet square involving genes that are only dominant on some other genes, some modification in uppercase vs lowercase might be necessary before presenting the genotypes, when using 'my' system.

I did find out where I got the idea of expressing dominance by using uppercase, it is the usual way when working on cockatiel breedings but I still think it might work the way I do it for corns too...

I think it is a bit odd, that these codes are meant to describe the genes snakes are build of (according to Joe), and not to express their dominance, cause the dominance is related to the genes on the loci.

 

[toyah]

It is convention that genes for characteristics are symbolized by letters - the name of the locus. Normally it's the first letter of the common gene name (such as "d" for dilute in cats/dogs/mice/etc), but it might also be from scientific literature ("c" for albino in every species, though it seems illogical), or it might have to have two letters if the initial choice is not available (so Pe is the pearl locus in rats, since P was already taken).
Each allele has the locus name, and is followed by an indicator letter (or letters) in superscript if necessary to distinguish it from other alleles. More dominant alleles are symbolized by capital letters and the recessives are symbolized by lower case letters. Them's the rules - I think you would have to speak to Mendel if you didn't agree

I do see the flaw that one time uppercase means; 'dominant to wild type' and in case of striped/motley with motley being dominant over striped (Ms) it means 'dominant over striped'. but, when a snake is only het for motley or striped, (Ws or Wm) or is homo for one of them (mm or ss) one sees that they are not dominant over wildtype.

Can you explain this a bit further for me because I can't make any sense of it. The motley and striped alleles are both recessive to the wild type, so in a standard genetic notation, they would be given lower case loci designations. Whatever the combination of alleles on a locus, they each can only ever be written lower case or upper case. So since both motley and stripe are recessive to wild type, they would only ever be written in lower case. An animal hetrozygous for both striped and motley alleles would have the genotype written with the symbol for striped and the symbol for motley as lowercase.

The general 'rule' would have to be; any gene tha tis dominant in general, has to be uppercased when homo.

No, that's not a general rule. The rule is, any allele which is dominant in general is written in uppercase whether it is homozygous or hetrozygous at that locus.

 

[Ssthisto]

What confuses me here is the use of "m" for motley and "s" for stripe. Assuming they are on the same locus, then they should start with the same letter and further mutations be identified by their superscripts. Motley was discovered first, so logically surely it would be M (non-motley wild type), m (motley), or m^s (stripe)?

Yes, I actually mentioned that Motley and Stripe should be expressed as m^m (or m as you suggest) and m^s respectively - but I shortened it to 'm' and 's' due to the lack of superscript-ability.

My apologies

 

[ladydragon]

OW OW OW OW!!! Just reading this post gave me a headache. I'm having enough trouble trying to learn single mutations let alone triple, quad and whatever else there might be out there.. but I am impressed with all the knowledge and glad to have a place to look and learn. Someday I'll get into breeding a pair, but for now.. just learning is work.. er I mean enough fun.

 

[SnakeAround]

It is convention that genes for characteristics are symbolized by letters - the name of the locus. Normally it's the first letter of the common gene name (such as "d" for dilute in cats/dogs/mice/etc), but it might also be from scientific literature ("c" for albino in every species, though it seems illogical), or it might have to have two letters if the initial choice is not available (so Pe is the pearl locus in rats, since P was already taken).
Each allele has the locus name, and is followed by an indicator letter (or letters) in superscript if necessary to distinguish it from other alleles. More dominant alleles are symbolized by capital letters and the recessives are symbolized by lower case letters. Them's the rules - I think you would have to speak to Mendel if you didn't agree



Can you explain this a bit further for me because I can't make any sense of it. The motley and striped alleles are both recessive to the wild type, so in a standard genetic notation, they would be given lower case loci designations. Whatever the combination of alleles on a locus, they each can only ever be written lower case or upper case. So since both motley and stripe are recessive to wild type, they would only ever be written in lower case. An animal hetrozygous for both striped and motley alleles would have the genotype written with the symbol for striped and the symbol for motley as lowercase.



No, that's not a general rule. The rule is, any allele which is dominant in general is written in uppercase whether it is homozygous or hetrozygous at that locus.

I don't say that this is the general rule with corns, but I'm used to work with cockatile genetics, in which some genes are dominant over wild type and therefoe expressed with uppercapital, it is a rule there. For me it would work with corn genetics too. Only with corns we have the motley gene which is dominant over striped and not over any other gene, and I don't know how to express that, since upper capital means 'dominant over wild type'. I then suggested that in case of motley/stripe, the m could be M and in case of het stripe, the m could be m, to express that it is not dominant over wild type. So Ms and mW.

Examples;
homo hypo = hh
homo motley = mm
'homo wild type' = WW (which we leave out in the genotype)
homo 'hypothetic new dominant gene F' = FF
het 'new dominant gene F' = Fw
ultramel = UA
het amel = aW
het ultra = uW

This way you can see at a glance which genes are dominant, hence predict the fenotype without using superscript. Of course the breeder writing down the genotypes must know that motley is dominant over striped only and that ultra is co-dominant with amel to apply upper or lowrr capital, but he should know that using any system anyway.....