• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

100% Het??????

Serp, that is excactly the point! Really, that is one big problem.
But I'll try to sum up a lot of mails that I get:

"I've red through several genetic tutorials and always thought, that one animal can be het or not. I've red snake XYZ e.g. Boa 66% het. Brian Sharp Albino. How is it possible for a snake to be 66% het?"

I have this mail in several version here.
Another thing is the poss - and be sure, I've written the calculator that uses poss.hets. and I get that question very often:

"66%poss.het. - how does it come to this fact?"

But people never asked me, if the snake is 66% het. - seems that they at least understand the difference.
I'm shure that people understand the het. thing pretty fast, but as a novice you are often not shure whether you're right and so on.

It's a little related to the genetic notations you are broadcasting. There are many pseudo notations that are not wrong and are usefull for fast explanations - but really correct and usefull is the notation you use and the thing is, if you got that right, you can get everything right and correct.
So why not try being a little more citical with the "het." notations?
 
Serpwidgets said:
I have to say that the confusion is caused by misunderstanding the meaning of heterozygous. Understanding that requires knowing that at a given locus one gene comes from the mother and the other comes from the father, and that the pair can be "same" or "different." Homozygous means same, Heterozygous means different.

The problems do not come in where percentages are used, but long before that, where people are taught psuedogenetics because it's "easier" to learn/teach. They are told that "het for ____" means there's a "____" gene there, or that "it has a parent who is ____" (which is where het for okeetee comes from) instead of explaining the actual meaning of the word het: the gene pair at that locus is made of two different alleles.

People rarely teach each other locus/allele because psuedogenetics has such a strong foothold on our hobby. But I think an effort to teach it the right way is beginning to work in the corn community because I see it more and more often (and usually correctly) in people's answers to genetics questions. :)
Click to expand...
Hey Chuck, I'm planning on picking up a copy of your book from Kathy in Tampa this weekend, is the het thing explained in there like you stated?
I am sad to say, that I am one of those that thinks like het means one of the parents were........ And I really want to get at the "dirt" of genetics.
Regardless, I'm still getting the book, if she has some :cheers:
 
Santa said:
My understanding is that if the snake got the same gene from both parents it would be homozygous and would therefore always demonstrate that gene. In addition if both parents were heterozygous for the hypo gene and the progeny was not hypo, then the progeny could be heterozygous (50%) or not carry the gene at all (0%).
Click to expand...
Not to pick on Santa because this is what a lot of poeple have been taught and believe to be true:

1- "Homozygous means it expresses a mutation." - Not true.

2- "Het means half of homo." - Not true.

3- Logical conclusions based on the above: het equates to "50%" and homo equates to "100%." - Not true.

This is what people learned, and it will serve them well in many situations, so they take it as true and teach it to others in good faith.

mbdorfer said:
Hey Chuck, I'm planning on picking up a copy of your book from Kathy in Tampa this weekend, is the het thing explained in there like you stated?
I am sad to say, that I am one of those that thinks like het means one of the parents were........ And I really want to get at the "dirt" of genetics.
Click to expand...
Yep, the book goes from the ground up and explains it all in one chapter. You may have to force yourself to unlearn a couple of words, and learn a total of about 9 vocab words (locus, allele, het, homo, recessive, codominant, dominant, genotype, phenotype) but in the end it is a much simpler way to see things. Mendelian genetics is very elegant, and you will find that things which used to be nonsense suddenly fall perfectly into place.
 
Serpwidgets said:
3- Logical conclusions based on the above: het equates to "50%" and homo equates to "100%." - Not true.
Click to expand...

I'll be a little picky right now:
Using 100% het. or 66% het. underlines this way of thinking.
Using het. and 66%poss.het. doesn't do anything against it, but it also doesn't underline anything... or am I wrong? I don't know, but there seems to be a reason that I get these mails.

...or people like to stress me :shrugs:
 
Perhaps we are a bit behind you - perhaps. But seems that US people like European genetic calculators
Click to expand...

Perhaps...but one would hope to see more and more people who don't need or use the crutch and take the next step up (or forward as the case may be). The more we can stress the importance of actually learning the few basic simple rules and a handful of terms involved with genetics, the less people will have use for the calculators (be they European or American). Once people get over the "genetics is scarey...wooo!" block and realize that there really isn't that much to know and it isn't that hard, they will have no use for the calculator. The calculators are nice when first learning, for viewing patterns, and double checking your answers, but if you know the material, they are pretty much as necessary as a scientific calculator to multiply 2 x 3 x 1. :D It just requires you to "learn your times tables".

I can't remember the last time I actually used one of those predictor programs. :D

I also think there are varying levels of knowledge in genetics (from zero on up) on both sides of the pond. :cheers:
 
Serpwidgets said:
Yep, the book goes from the ground up and explains it all in one chapter. You may have to force yourself to unlearn a couple of words, and learn a total of about 9 vocab words (locus, allele, het, homo, recessive, codominant, dominant, genotype, phenotype) but in the end it is a much simpler way to see things. Mendelian genetics is very elegant, and you will find that things which used to be nonsense suddenly fall perfectly into place.
Click to expand...
Nine new words! at my age! Oh the pressure :grin01:
Thanks Serp, can't wait to get my hands on it :cheers:
 
Hmmm - I'm not quite shure if you understood the opinion why I programmed the calculator.
I don't think that my version calculates 2x3x4.
I bet, your mind is clever enough to calculate your chances for MotleyXStripe double het. YZ X Normal triple het. Stripe, X, Z and I think mine is too - but I bet you also need a little paper and a pen to write it down - and what's the use to do it?
I wrote the calculator for the same fact I use a normal calculator - for typing in 63x78x(3/8) and be sure, I can do it also in my head and I know the basics of mathematics.

...using a calculator doesn't mean you didn't understand genetics, it's just some kind of tool for problems that go ower simple hets. or double hets. or with the not so obvious codominant traits in connection with different hets.

So, I think it's quite sad for you that you wasted so much paper instead of typing it into a calculator :rolleyes:
(that was a joke... just to make that clear!)
 
Who said I wasted trees?!? LOL (also said in good humor, just to be clear) And yeah, I calculate what I need to know in my head 99 times out of 100...unless it's something like messing with linked genes and probabilities associated with that (but I don't know of a corn genetics predictor out there that'll do that for me, anyway).

You know what I mean, though. I hate to see people get stuck in a rut with the predictors and never realize the overall patterns and never grow, you know? I made my Punnett squares first starting out, I saw for myself where the 9:3:3:1 came from (3:1 x 3:1), I checked with the calculators. But quite honestly, 99 times out of a 100, I have no use for one anymore and I like having that "skill", if you call it that.

The main purpose of my post was not to downgrade your calculator, it's very good at what it does. My purpose was to encourage the new genetics enthusiasts out there to learn the basis behind it and encourage them to practice. Work out all possible combos with all their snakes. Think about if you could only add one snake, what would get them the most bang for their buck and why. I encourage this because otherwise they will need a calculator to add 2 + 9 and their computer won't be there at the show when they are trying to decide on which pair of corns with what hets to buy.

I just think if they click the buttons and print the results and that's it, it stunts their knowledge growth if they never take the time to learn the basis behind it or the basics. It's like saying 12 * 3 is 36 because the calculator said so without even knowing what multiplication is all about. Use it as a tool to learn, but I hate to see people rely on it as their sole genetics source. They could understand so much more with just a little learning. :D

:cheers:
 
You are right and I seemed to get you a little wrong - perhaps cause my "help" for the calculator is in german.
I excactly point that out in my help. I linked serps genetics site and others in german and highly recommend learning that and using the claculator as a plain old tool - not as an almanach or wizard. Thats the reason why I only use the recessive trait names for itself, without combos and trivial names.

You can bet, my Inbox is full of mails how they can type "Snow" into the calculator - I always say then "As long as you ask me that, you should NOT use my calculator!" ...people often don't understand that immediately, but as soon as they learn and read the links, they know what I meant.
 
:-offtopic Given the discussion, but Santa, please read Howie's post and pm him BEFORE you buy the snake. I know it sounds like a great deal, but the man who posted that ad has very questionable shipping practices. (Hence the cheap price including shipping) JMO
 
JTGoff69 said:
:-offtopic Given the discussion, but Santa, please read Howie's post and pm him BEFORE you buy the snake. I know it sounds like a great deal, but the man who posted that ad has very questionable shipping practices. (Hence the cheap price including shipping) JMO
Click to expand...


Oh geezes. Are we talking about Rays Reptilia and his shipping through USPS?

It's gotta be, he has a ton of ads on kingsuck.

Head over to the BOI and do a search for Rays Reptilia.
 
What's the problem? It's well known how he ships, F the tact with it. If someone wants to ship USPS they should get called out on it.
 
JTGoff69 said:
:-offtopic Given the discussion, but Santa, please read Howie's post and pm him BEFORE you buy the snake. I know it sounds like a great deal, but the man who posted that ad has very questionable shipping practices. (Hence the cheap price including shipping) JMO
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up, but I wasn't planning on buying the snake. I was just reading thru the ads.

Santa
:santa:
 
Het is a gene carrier 100 % het is a redundant term thouth true possable hets is just what it says it is possable this comes from two hets bred together. in the normal young you cant tell who is carrying the gene. This is my pet pea when you have multi hets bred together who cares what percent chance you get to get the multi mutation you want. Case fact it is a roll of the dice in what you get . percentages dont mean squat. I bred a amber motley het for anery A and amel to his mother she is het for hypo, anery A. motley, amel, and caramel. Last year I did not get one amel in either 1 st or 2 nd clutch. It is all a gamble. You can have 1 out of a 120 chances of getting a corn with multi homo animal in a clutch ,you can have 10 eggs and have 3 babies that can hatch in the clutch and beat the odds. this is why you can figure out all your odds and never have a clutch can come out the way you predict. If some told dont do tha cross because you only have a 1 out of a 480 chancesto produce the multi mutation. I would still do it so who cares what percentages you get that wont gurantee you wether you produce what you want or not.
 
Taking odds literally renders them useless. Every once in a while you will see someone who is confused that their clutch of 12, which was supposed to hatch 6 of one thing and 6 of another, has broken the laws of the universe and so they dismiss the whole idea as invalid.

But probabilities, when taken in context, are an extremely useful and powerful tool and are far better than "we don't know." A great deal of the technology developed in the last half of the 20th century has come from practical applications of probabilities, and a lot more will come from it.

It's not the size of the odds, it's how you use them. :grin01:
 
Great discussion you guys...I must say, I didn't even know there was a genetic calculator until a couple of weeks ago. I purchased Serp's book back in January and took to learning it for myself.

Not to downplay your calculator at all Menhir(like Hurley said, its a great tool), but I am SO glad that I am not restricted to using it as my guide to the morphs. I agree with you Hurley, I hate to see people stunted by calculators...not just genetic calculators.

Thanks Serp and Menhir for your contributions.
 
Joejr14 said:
F the tact with it.
Click to expand...

The answer to the question, "could you describe yourself in five words or less?" :sidestep:

Jen, meet joe. :crazy02:

regards,
jazz
 
very inportant for genetic reserch yes for the breeder this info can hurt a breeder . when you look at the odds , sometimes they are stacked up way aginst you so someone might not want to take a chance .Look at the striped, hypo ,lavender bloodred. you can cross a hypo lav. to a striped blood there fore produceing normal 4 way hets. long shot odds or spend more years bulding up to your goal producing diffrent combos to breed together. striped bloods to a hypo lav blood and produce bloods het for a hypo, lav, stripe or striped bloods x hypo lav het for stripe better odds, or a hypo , lav, blood, het for stripe x to a hypo striped lavender. produceing hypo striped lav. het for bloodred more better odds to produce a Striped, hypo, laverder, bloodred. But look how many years it will take you to achive your goal. I rather make 4 way hets and keep more animals backand play the odds. this is just my personal exp. Serp can you print out the odds, you are good at this I'm not, it would be nice to show people the percentages. So a person can make their own mind up on which way to go when doing a project.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top