Announcement

Collapse

Advertising Inquiries

See more
See less

Genetics bullshit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Genetics bullshit

    Couple of different parts here, but I will try and summarize.

    1. I cross a bar-eyed female fly with a wild type male.
    The progeny all express the bar eyed trait, I have 503 female and 515 male.
    My initial thought was that the bar eyed trait would be autosomal dominant, yet it could also be sex linked dominant if the parental female was homozygous for the trait. So WTF

    2. I cross a stubble bristle female with a wild type male.
    Half of the progeny express stubble, the other half express wild type, that is without considering sex. When sex is considered the numbers are 256 wt females, 227 stubble females, 254 wt males, 260 stubble males. So the stubble trait obviously doesn't follow simple dom/recessive rules, but I can't figure out the mode of transmission.

    I need to figure out the exact mode of transmission of the above genes to be able to complete this next part.

    3.A bar eyed, wt bristle female is crossed with a wt eye, stubble bristle male
    The progeny result in (245 female bar eye, wt bristle,) (244 female bar eye, stubble), (266 male bar eye, wt bristle) and (245 male bar eye, stubble).



    This is my only class and I have never liked genetics, I should of already been done with school, but when I switched from chem to bio they had changed something in the bio degree, which resulted in me being required to take this shit. I just had a test over this stuff and got a B, yet when trying to do this lab I just make myself confused and angry.

    Dna, if you instantly grasp it and have some input great, if you don't want to use your Sunday looking at it that is fine also, no problem.

  • #2
    ahhh shit...I remember this. Let me look though my notes and textbook. Can't figure this out at the top of my mind.

    PM Mag and Shibby to come respond to this thread.

    Comment


    • #3
      What I don't like is for instance on #1, it could be sex linked but only would hold true if the mom is homozygous, same for autosomal. I emailed my teacher and his response was worthless.

      Comment


      • #4
        Fuck 'em.

        Add some TAQ and cook the bastards in your thermal cycler.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by decadecadeca View Post
          Fuck 'em.

          Add some TAQ and cook the bastards in your thermal cycler.
          :rofl::rofl:

          What a science nerd.

          Comment


          • #6
            Well Turbo, i came to a blank, sorry bro. Good luck with this class

            Comment


            • #7
              I think number 2 is sex linked. The mom is heterozygous, with stubble being dominant.


              DNA........you suck.

              Comment


              • #8
                and this is why i'm a social science major. :D

                Comment

                Working...
                X