Enigma trait expression

[cjreptiles]

I don't see why ?? dominant hypo-aka-ghost is said to be as simple as ghost X normal = 50/50ish and ghost X ghost = 100% ghost.Mack pastel is said to be as simple as mack pastel X normal = 50/50ish and mack pastel X mack pastel = 100% mack pastel.Also i've read the gem snow's are also said to be gem snow X normal = 50/50%ish and gem snow X gem snow = 100% gem snow.So what is it that make you think there hidden allele's in enigmas that gives you all that other jargen ?? why wouldn't it be plain is or is't.

I don't know what you mean about hidden alleles. Or "jargen".

You are saying the Mack pastel gene is dominant. I'm not disputing this. So effectively what you are saying is the gecko looks the same whether is has one mutated gene or two. Right? Otherwise it isn't dominant.

If this is the case, when a Mack pastel has TWO mutated 'Mack pastel' genes, ONE will ALWAYS be passed on to the next generation, so 100% of offspring would be Mack pastel, whatever you crossed it with. Likewise, it you had two Mack pastels that both had one mutated gene and one normal gene, there is a possibility (25%) that a normal offspring could be born.

That's how dominant genes work. I'm not sure which part of it you don't understand.

 

[Gregg M]

Why do you believe this to be the case?

Because if it is visually showing the mutated gene it is not het for that mutated gene, it is that mutated gene...

Why is this hard to understand???

Do you consider abinos, hets??? No, you consider them albinos...

Enigmas are not het for Enigma, they ARE Enigmas...

Besides, how can you be talking so deeply about a morph that is not fully understood by anyone at this point???

You are talking like it is a matter of fact when it is actually your opinion with nothing to back it up besides speculation...

 

[cjreptiles]

Because if it is visually showing the mutated gene it is not het for that mutated gene, it is that mutated gene...

Why is this hard to understand???

Do you consider abinos, hets??? No, you consider them albinos...

Enigmas are not het for Enigma, they ARE Enigmas...

Besides, how can you be talking so deeply about a morph that is not fully understood by anyone at this point???

You are talking like it is a matter of fact when it is actually your opinion with nothing to back it up besides speculation...

They are not het FOR enigma because they are already enigma. However, they are the heterozygous FORM of enigma (as I said before, it might help you to think of them as het for normal, as the enigma gene is dominant over the normal gene).

This is all assuming the enigma gene is dominant as currently believe. We obviously can't be certain this is the case at the moment, but I don't think discussing the possibilities hurts. I am simply trying to explain how dominant genes work. I didn't think it would be this much hassle.

 

[Gazz]

The only person at presant that can lay this to rest is KelliH ? i know she has one or two red eyed enigmas from a enigma X enigma breeding so if it's what your saying and kelliH bred these so called double enigma thing to a standed bell it would result in 100% red eyed enigma not one standed bell offsping would show.KelliH you done or doing this type of breeding any time soon ??.

 

[cjreptiles]

so if it's what your saying and kelliH bred these so called double enigma thing to a standed bell it would result in 100% red eyed enigma not one standed bell offsping would show.

You would only get any Bell/red eyed offspring if the enigma was het. for Bell (or red eyed, i.e. homozygous Bell).

 

[Sandra]

Because if it is visually showing the mutated gene it is not het for that mutated gene, it is that mutated gene...

That's only true for recessives. There exist hets for ALL types of mutation, it's just that they are expressed in different ways in the phenotype of the het. I thought I made that clear in my explanation, but doesn't seem that way. Please, try to re-read it putting apart everything that you have learned before because it's obvious that you have it all wrong.

All mutations are fully expressed in the homozygous, but only dominants are fully expressed in the heteozygous too. That doesn't make them less heterozygous than the rest.

Do you consider abinos, hets??? No, you consider them albinos...

That's because albinism is a recessive gene, therefore it is only expressed in the homozygous. Of course, you don't call a homozygous heterozygous. Enigmas (if they are dominant) are fully expresed in the homozygous form AND the heterozygous, so both are called enigmas.

Besides, how can you be talking so deeply about a morph that is not fully understood by anyone at this point???

I don't know (and don't care) if enigmas are dominant, incomplete dominant, or whatever. If they are dominant, they will work the way I say. I'm only saying that. If not, they won't, but nothing of what I've said would be incorrect. It's not speculation, it's a proven fact that dominant mutations work this way.

 

[Jeremy Letkey]

I love genetics..... I have all the answers but I am not sharing! :main_evilgrin: :main_lipsrsealed:

 

[Gazz]

You would only get any Bell/red eyed offspring if the enigma was het. for Bell (or red eyed, i.e. homozygous Bell).

Why are you selecting bits of what i said ?? i said that kelliH has some red eyed enigmas from a enigma X enigma breeding and it was these to what i was refering if you read the full post :main_thumbsup: .

 

[Ian S.]

I may be mistaken..... he he.....but, I think Kelli has already said that enigma x normal has
produced 50/50 and enigma x enigma has produced 100% enigmas. = dom. I tried to find the post but holy good lord there is so much crap to sift through.

 

[cjreptiles]

Why are you selecting bits of what i said ?? i said that kelliH has some red eyed enigmas from a enigma X enigma breeding and it was these to what i was refering if you read the full post :main_thumbsup: .

Your post was:
"The only person at presant that can lay this to rest is KelliH ? i know she has one or two red eyed enigmas from a enigma X enigma breeding so if it's what your saying and kelliH bred these so called double enigma thing to a standed bell it would result in 100% red eyed enigma not one standed bell offsping would show.KelliH you done or doing this type of breeding any time soon ??."
You only asked one question that I could answer, so that's the one I answered. She would only have got red-eyed offspring if both enigmas were either heterozygous or homozygous for Bell albinism.

If she bred a red-eyed enigma (as opposed to a "double enigma", whatever you mean by that...possibly homozygous enigma...who knows) to a Bell, she would either expect 50% red-eyed enigma offspring and 50% Bells if the enigma was the heterozygous (Ee) form, or 100% red-eyed enigma offspring if it was the homozygous (EE) form. Just because the enigma you seem to be referred to has two enigma parents, it does not necessarily mean it is homozgyous enigma (EE) although this is most likely.

This is all assuming the enigma trait is dominant, of course.

 

[boutiquegecko]

Jeremy-you are wicked

 

[Grinning Geckos]

The full correct term is "autosomal dominate". This basically means the trait is different from normal (aka wild type) genes, but it's expressed dominantly....even overriding the normal dominate gene. The homozygous and heterozygous forms look identical. Sandra has the stats right.

Traits like this absolutely exist ... I have one of them. I have a condition called Ehlers-Danlos, and it's inherited by autosomal dominance. Because my Mom has it and my Dad doesn't that makes me Het (lol). My daughter has a 50% chance of having this disorder. It's still too early to tell if she has it ... but she either has the gene and will display the disorder, or she doesn't and won't. There is no in-between. If she has it, then she too has a 50% chance of passing it on to any of her children.

 

[Grinning Geckos]

Something else does not change... If the animal is visually expressing the genetic mutation, it is not a het... It is what it is...

Also, has it been proven that Enigma X Enigma = 100% Enigmas???

Sorry, you're wrong there buddy. I agree with you, so far as there's not much point to stating it's het enigma ... most of them probably are. What you want to call it, and what it is genetically are two different things. It's actually far more difficult to prove that you have a homozygous enigma than a het. The only way you can PROVE you have a homozygous enigma is to breed it to a normal and hatch out 100% enigmas. (All assuming this is a dominate trait) :main_thumbsup:

 

[StinaKSU]

wow...there is a lot of genetics misunderstanding in this thread............

I will try to make a relatively quick rundown of very basic genetics.......

A dominant allele is a form of a gene that will hide a different allele ("form") of the same gene. A dominant allele in either a homozygous (2 of the same allele) or heterozygous (2 different alleles) arrangement will produce the SAME appearance.

A recessive allele is a form of a gene that will be hidden by a different allele ("form") of the same gene. A recessive allele will not be visible in a heterozygous genotype, and will ONLY be expressed as a visible phenotype when the animal is homozygous.

With incomplete and codominant alleles you have 3 different appearances, 2 different homozygous and a heterozygous. The heterozygous is some sort of appearance that's between the 2 homozygous appearances.

Heterozygous is PURELY a genetics term referring to the ARRANGEMENT of alleles that an animal has....it does NOT equate to the animal's appearance...any animal with 2 different alleles is heterzygous regardless of what the appearance is. When you are dealing with a dominant gene you have homozygous and heterozygous dominant animals that both have the same appearance but DIFFERENT genetics...the terms homozygous and heterozygous allow you to differentiate which is which. With a recessive allele the term heterozygous allows you to tell if an animal is carrying the recessive form.

With any of the possibilities you have 3 different genetic combination possibilities... Two homozygous, and a heterozygous.....if you use "A" and "a" as symbols, with A being dominant and a being recessive, they would appear as AA, Aa, and aa. AA is homozygous dominant, Aa is heterozygous dominant, and aa is homozygous recessive. AA and Aa will produce the SAME appearance if you are dealing with a dominant gene.

When breeding if you breed a homozygous dominant animal to a homozygous recessive animal (which i will just refer to as recessive now...) you will get
.......A.....A
a....Aa....Aa
a....Aa....Aa
The result in this case is going to be 100% heterozygous dominant animals that will all have the same appearance as the homozygous dominant parent.

When breeding a heterozygous dominant animal to a recessive animal you will get
......A.....a
a....Aa...aa
a....Aa...aa
The result here is 50% heterozygous dominant animals with the same appearance as the heterozygous dominant parent...and 50% recessive animals the same appearance as the recessive parent.

When breeding a heterozygous dominant animal to another heterozygous dominant animal you will get
......A.....a
A....AA...Aa
a....Aa...aa
The result here is that you get 75% animals with the same appearance as the parents, about 66% of them will be heterozygous dominant and 33% will be homozygous dominant. You will also get 25% recessive animals that will NOT look like the parents.......which means even when breeding two animals with an appearance caused by a dominant gene you will NOT always get 100% dominant offspring.

now...if you breed a homozygous dominant with a heterozygous dominant you will get
......A.....a
A....AA...Aa
A....AA...Aa
NOW you will get ALL dominant appearing offspring...and 50% will be heterozygous dominant and 50% homozygous dominant.

If you breed 2 homozygous dominant animals you will get 100% homozygous dominant offspring with the same appearance as the parents. if you breed 2 recessive animals you will produce 100% recessive offspring.

Genes with a "super" form are NOT simple dominant...they are either codominant or incompletely dominant.

This is NOT theory, this is fact when dealing with simple genetics. There can be many other factors such as linkage and multiple genes leading to one appearance...but that is how simple genes work. If enigma is a simple dominant morph then breeding an enigma to a normal will produce EITHER 50% normals and 50% enigmas OR 100% enigmas....you would ONLY get 100% enigmas if the enigma parent is homozygous dominant....and you would not be able to tell by looking at them which is homozygous and which is heterozygous because they would both look the same.

At any rate....I hope that made sense is helpful to at least one person.....lol

 

[Lyndsey]

Isn't this like the 4th "genetics" argument thread?

I thought Kelli or someone asked for these not to be beaten to death again?

 

[Grinning Geckos]

Isn't this like the 4th "genetics" argument thread?

I thought Kelli or someone asked for these not to be beaten to death again?

I must have missed the others. Clearly, some people don't understand dominate genetics, and some do. The ones that do are attempting to help those that don't. I see a bunch of misunderstanding, but not really arguing.

 

[eyelids]

Isn't this like the 4th "genetics" argument thread?

I thought Kelli or someone asked for these not to be beaten to death again?

That was about Stripes, but I agree with you...

 

[StinaKSU]

I agree shanti...there isn't really much arguing going on here....but a lot of misunderstandings and people trying to help others understand better...I don't see what's so wrong about trying to help?...

 

[Lyndsey]

I agree shanti...there isn't really much arguing going on here....but a lot of misunderstandings and people trying to help others understand better...I don't see what's so wrong about trying to help?...

Oi...lol

I wasn't saying not to do it or that you were arguing

I was just asking a question from what I remember

Plus, we all know how easily an argument with name calling can erupt :main_yes:

 

[Gregg M]

Sorry, you're wrong there buddy. I agree with you, so far as there's not much point to stating it's het enigma

Thats what I am getting at...:main_thumbsup: I think the people who are trying to help people understand the genetics are confusing people more than helping them with the het thing... Why call an Enigma a het for Enigma??? You know if you breed and Enigma to a normal, you are always going to get Enigmas...

Honestly, I think Stina did the best job breaking it down to a more understandable level because she incorporated the other genetics...

Good job Stina!!!:main_thumbsup: