co-dominant traits...

[Clownfishie]

Ok, so I think I kind of understand the idea behind a co-dominant trait. Like pastel for example -- regular pastel is a visible het for super pastel, right? You breed 2 pastels together, and you have a chance of producing a super pastel. You breed a pastel to a normal, and you have a chance of producing pastel babies. But what about the siblings in that pairing? Are they just plain straight normals, or do they also carry the pastel/super pastel gene in some way?

I'm so confused -- LOL Give me my plain old simple recessive leo traits any day *grin*... but I want to understand this stuff before I get into breeding my bps...

Thanks for any insight you can give
Jen

[Jeff_Favelle]

No, the normal siblings are just normal. If the pastel gene it present, it will be expressed. It is DOMINANT over the wild-type gene(s). Think of the normals as normals. Pastels are hets. Super pastels are homos.


Ha ha, homos.

[Clownfishie]

LOL... gee Jeff, THAT was mature...

Thanks for the clarification... so basically, getting a "pastel sibling" means nothing more than getting a normal, eh?

[Jeff_Favelle]

Welcome to my world.

.......er.....Pastel siblings, not the homo-thing.

Ha ha, "not that there's anything wrong with that". LOL!

[NiagaraReptiles]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

too funny!!

Anyway, co-dominant is actually an incorrect term in reference to the Pastel strain. Incomplete dominant is more accurate.

Laughing too hard still to talk more genetics tonight

[Jeff_Favelle]

Heh heh, thanks Kendrick.! LOL!

But I find "co-dominant" to be a more accurate term. "Incomplete dominance" implies that the alleles are not dominant unless in homozygous form. Co-dominant implies (to me) that the alleles are dominant in both heterozygous and homozygous forms and that the homozygous form is more extreme.

Thoughts?