N incei gold dimorphism

[cold blood]

There is a good discussion thread here on how the recessive gene works with the N. incei
http://arachnoboards.com/threads/holothele-incei-gold.213523/
I believe that @coldblood has seen this in his recent sac of both (olive) parents producing @ 25% golds in the sac

I paired two olive color forms and got 128 slings...101 were olive, 27 were "gold".

 

[EulersK]

I paired two olive color forms and got 128 slings...101 were olive, 27 were "gold".

For those keeping track at home, that's a 21% rate

I think that's quite a coincidence, don't you? We're pretty darn close to 25% of offspring carrying the gold phenotype. Following the classic punnet square, we'd get that the gold phenotype is recessive:

Assume the dominant gene is the olive and the recessive gene is the gold


This is assuming a few things.

1. Both parents carried the recessive gene (the gold color)
2. Both parents carries the dominant gene (the olive color)
3. There are no outside factors affecting the genes, such a temperature or gestation period

Now, the reverse would be true. Had even a single parent carried only the olive genotype (AA rather than Aa), then not a single sling would be of the gold color form. On top of that, if both parents were of the gold phenotype, then all slings would be gold. Can someone confirm or deny this last statement? It's by far the most important. In conjunction with what I've laid out above, if two gold parents yield even a single olive sling, then my entire theory is wrong.

Definitions of terms used:
Phenotype = Visually expressed inheritance
Genotype = Inheritance expressed only in the DNA
Recessive gene = Only displayed when individual lacks the dominant gene
Dominant gene = Always displayed by individual if possessed

 

[sdsnybny]

For those keeping track at home, that's a 21% rate

I think that's quite a coincidence, don't you? We're pretty darn close to 25% of offspring carrying the gold phenotype. Following the classic punnet square, we'd get that the gold phenotype is recessive:

Assume the dominant gene is the olive and the recessive gene is the gold
View attachment 216848

This is assuming a few things.

1. Both parents carried the recessive gene (the gold color)
2. Both parents carries the dominant gene (the olive color)
3. There are no outside factors affecting the genes, such a temperature or gestation period

Now, the reverse would be true. Had even a single parent carried only the olive genotype (AA rather than Aa), then not a single sling would be of the gold color form. On top of that, if both parents were of the gold phenotype, then all slings would be gold. Can someone confirm or deny this last statement? It's by far the most important. In conjunction with what I've laid out above, if two gold parents yield even a single olive sling, then my entire theory is wrong.

Definitions of terms used:
Phenotype = Visually expressed inheritance
Genotype = Inheritance expressed only in the DNA
Recessive gene = Only displayed when individual lacks the dominant gene
Dominant gene = Always displayed by individual if possessed

Same info in the linked thread from my above post, and yes from what I've read gold w/gold equals all gold slings
Also @cold blood results doesn't factor in any dud eggs and what they would have been

 

[EulersK]

Same info in the linked thread from my above post, and yes from what I've read gold w/gold equals all gold slings

Disappointing that I'm not the first to think of it (although not surprising), but then that pretty much seals it. There is likely only one gene for the gold phenotype, which isn't too great for breeders. You can't expect any gold slings at all if even one parent is of the olive color form.

 

[cold blood]

Same info in the linked thread from my above post, and yes from what I've read gold w/gold equals all gold slings
Also @cold blood results doesn't factor in any dud eggs and what they would have been

there were no dud eggs, 100% survival.

 

[saturnthegrey]

@cold blood I have 8 incei gold forms that range in size from 1" to adult size so I guess my chances of hatching more golds will be very good. What do you think the ratio would be for the normal olive form if both parents are gold?

 

[cold blood]

@cold blood I have 8 incei gold forms that range in size from 1" to adult size so I guess my chances of hatching more golds will be very good. What do you think the ratio would be for the normal olive form if both parents are gold?

According to previous posts, gold plus gold equals all gold...although I haven't tested the theory.

 

[saturnthegrey]

@cold blood I would love to get some normal color forms so when the time comes I hope that's not the case.

 

[cold blood]

@cold blood I would love to get some normal color forms so when the time comes I hope that's not the case.

If you breed them, keep us posted, I'd be very interested to know if they produced any olive color forms.

 

[viper69]

You can't expect any gold slings at all if even one parent is of the olive color form.

This is absolutely not true- I'm surprised you didn't know this given your Punnet square and the link I put up too.

If you have two parents who are heterozygotes, you absolutely will get gold, at a 25% rate IF the trait is a simple recessive gene, which so far seems to be the case for H. incei, but more breeding would need to be done.

Let A equal normal color form, and lower case a equal gold.

Aa
AA

The above are both examples of progeny that will look normal. aa, a homozygous recessive individual is the only outcome that will produce a gold individual.

If you breed a heterozygous normal form with a gold, you'll have 50% gold progeny.

This is scientific fact, not opinion hah.

 

[viper69]

What do you think the ratio would be for the normal olive form if both parents are gold?

If being gold is a simple recessive trait, then in the above example, you would only produce gold progeny. This is science.

See my earlier post in this thread with a link for Mendelian genetics.

 

[viper69]

For those keeping track at home, that's a 21% rate

I think that's quite a coincidence, don't you? We're pretty darn close to 25% of offspring carrying the gold phenotype. Following the classic punnet square, we'd get that the gold phenotype is recessive:

Assume the dominant gene is the olive and the recessive gene is the gold
View attachment 216848

This is assuming a few things.

1. Both parents carried the recessive gene (the gold color)
2. Both parents carries the dominant gene (the olive color)
3. There are no outside factors affecting the genes, such a temperature or gestation period

Now, the reverse would be true. Had even a single parent carried only the olive genotype (AA rather than Aa), then not a single sling would be of the gold color form. On top of that, if both parents were of the gold phenotype, then all slings would be gold. Can someone confirm or deny this last statement? It's by far the most important. In conjunction with what I've laid out above, if two gold parents yield even a single olive sling, then my entire theory is wrong.

Definitions of terms used:
Phenotype = Visually expressed inheritance
Genotype = Inheritance expressed only in the DNA
Recessive gene = Only displayed when individual lacks the dominant gene
Dominant gene = Always displayed by individual if possessed

This is basic Mendelian genetics for simple recessive traits and is scientifically proven.

 

[EulersK]

This is absolutely not true- I'm surprised you didn't know this given your Punnet square and the link I put up too.

If you have two parents who are heterozygotes, you absolutely will get gold, at a 25% rate IF the trait is a simple recessive gene, which so far seems to be the case for H. incei, but more breeding would need to be done.

Let A equal normal color form, and lower case a equal gold.

Aa
AA

The above are both examples of progeny that will look normal. aa, a homozygous recessive individual is the only outcome that will produce a gold individual.

If you breed a heterozygous normal form with a gold, you'll have 50% gold progeny.

This is scientific fact, not opinion hah.

Key word is EXPECT I understand all of that. You can't expect any gold with two olive parents because you have no way of knowing if either parent is homozygous. If even one parent is a homozygote, then you will get exactly 0 gold slings.

 

[saturnthegrey]

@viper69 is there any proof that two gold forms will only produce golds? I intend to find out eventually but I don't think anyone can say for sure that gold+ gold will equal only gold.

 

[viper69]

@viper69 is there any proof that two gold forms will only produce golds? I intend to find out eventually but I don't think anyone can say for sure that gold+ gold will equal only gold.

I'm sure someone who has bred them knows. This conversation is predicated on the assumption that the gold gene follows Mendelian genetics for simple recessive genes. IF true, golds only produce golds.

So far the numbers indicate it is, but more breeding or breeding records from those who have experimented would be needed.

 

[viper69]

Key word is EXPECT I understand all of that. You can't expect any gold with two olive parents because you have no way of knowing if either parent is homozygous. If even one parent is a homozygote, then you will get exactly 0 gold slings.

That's more appropriate. The way you phrased it previously was wrong. You only wrote "olive color form", in a single recessive trait context, that phenotype is produced by 2 genotypes.

 

[EulersK]

That's more appropriate. The way you phrased it previously was wrong. You only wrote "olive color form", in a single recessive trait context, that phenotype is produced by 2 genotypes.

Was I wrong, or did you roll with context?

I admit, it was a bit confusing haha

Edit:
Actually, my rephrased statement was technically wrong! Only one parent needs to be olive for the possibility of 100% olive slings!

 

[EulersK]

I'm sure someone who has bred them knows. This conversation is predicated on the assumption that the gold gene follows Mendelian genetics for simple recessive genes. IF true, golds only produce golds.

So far the numbers indicate it is, but more breeding or breeding records from those who have experimented would be needed.

Looking at past breeding reports, it seems to be pretty well documented that offspring are either 25-75 or no golds at all. An actual sequencing would need to be done to be certain, but I did find a breeding report last night of two gold parents yielding only gold offspring. That's pretty compelling evidence. I can post that report when I get home tonight, if someone wants.

 

[viper69]

Was I wrong, or did you roll with context?

I admit, it was a bit confusing haha

You left out important science terms, so yes you were wrong.

 

[viper69]

Looking at past breeding reports, it seems to be pretty well documented that offspring are either 25-75 or no golds at all. An actual sequencing would need to be done to be certain, but I did find a breeding report last night of two gold parents yielding only gold offspring. That's pretty compelling evidence. I can post that report when I get home tonight, if someone wants.

I'm of the opinion that sequencing may not be needed. It worked for Gregor Mendel and his pea plants