Possible het's

[piranhaking]

Lets use X for a dom trait, and O for normal.
Animals have two copies of each gene. During gamete (sperm/egg) production, only one copy of each gene is passed on. Actually one cell splits into 4 gametes technically, but that doesnt matter in this example, so for the sake of making it simpler lets just say one cell forms one gamete.

lets say dad ha OX and mom has XX
Dads sperm will be randomly O or X.
Moms eggs will be X
If dad only formed and released 4 sperm at a time and fertilized 4 eggs in the mother, then the outcome would be guarenteed to be XX, XX, XX, and OX. The problem with that is that dad makes many sperm and out of that group only some fertilize the eggs. Lets say dad makes X, X, X, X, O, O, O, O. That group of sperm follows the "rules" and is half and half. But, only part of that group gets to mom's eggs. That group could be any random group of 4 (to stick with the example, but it would be how every many eggs are fertilized) That means the possible combinations for the genes that make it to the eggs are XXXX, XXXO, XXOO, XOOO, and OOOO. There are more possibilities than that because in XXOO each X could be any of the 4 X's and each O could be any of the 4 O's. That is why its possible for several in a clutch to prove out, or for none of them to prove out. I hope this made sense.

PS, this was meant to go after what is now post #44
in this thread.

[SnakeySnakeSnake]

hrm...

[Kizerk]

That's not true ... a possible het is a possible het ... period. You have the exact same chances of proving or not proving 3 female possible hets whether they all come from the same clutch or from 3 different clutches ... Psycholigically, it "feels better" to have all the girls from a clutch for example, but in reality it gains you no advantage what so ever.

I've been producing, buying, and proving possible hets for many many years and the key is quantity ... nothing more.

-adam

oh ok, i know what you mean

psychologically , i would feel better buying all the possiblet hets, in a clutch, because i feel like it increases my chances of getting a het, which isn't true...b/c what's there is there, thanks for helping me sort that out

[rabernet]

Oy!! This thread makes my head hurt! LOL


Great information - we really do have such a great group of contributors here!

[jhall1468]

He's right. We usually use 4 eggs as an example, so say there is a 25% chance of an egg having the gene, then 1 out of 4 of the babies will have the gene. On average in a large number of groups of eggs, 1 in 4 would have the gene but it is still completely random, and there is no guarentee that one of any clutch of four would have the gene. However, the way it is often discussed it would be easy to think it means that out of 4 eggs one is guarenteed to have the gene. If we KNEW that one out of four eggs in a clutch has the gene, then you more you buy from one clutch the better your chances would be, but since there is no guarentee that the gene is passed on to one of the eggs buying more from the same clutch doesnt affect your chances. I hope that made sense....

That's incorrect, both technically and in real-life use. When we discuss "50%" it literally means that any one individual snake has a 50% chance of being het.

So regardless of whether you pick up an entire clutch or pick and choose your snakes that statistics won't vary. Again, we have to realize that nothing we can do when picking hets will increase the probability of getting "more hets" because whether each snake is het or not is completely independant of whether the next snake is.

Whether we pick and choose in a closed system (only from the same clutch) or an open system (regardless of whether it's from the same clutch) the variables don't change, so the odds remain the same.

edit: sorry after re-reading it I realized you agreed with Adam .

When I posted, I was rushing to get out the door to go to work. But, as I was thinking about your post, I realized that you had answered my question about diminishing confidence. I just now got home from work, and I still gotta think about it some, but I know the answer is there!

Well at least something good came out of it. We can really get creative with this as well, think double hets, double homozygous .

[piranhaking]

That's not true ... a possible het is a possible het ... period. You have the exact same chances of proving or not proving 3 female possible hets whether they all come from the same clutch or from 3 different clutches ... Psycholigically, it "feels better" to have all the girls from a clutch for example, but in reality it gains you no advantage what so ever.

I've been producing, buying, and proving possible hets for many many years and the key is quantity ... nothing more.

-adam

He's right. We usually use 4 eggs as an example, so say there is a 25% chance of an egg having the gene, then 1 out of 4 of the babies will have the gene. On average in a large number of groups of eggs, 1 in 4 would have the gene but it is still completely random, and there is no guarentee that one of any clutch of four would have the gene. However, the way it is often discussed it would be easy to think it means that out of 4 eggs one is guarenteed to have the gene. If we KNEW that one out of four eggs in a clutch has the gene, then you more you buy from one clutch the better your chances would be, but since there is no guarentee that the gene is passed on to one of the eggs buying more from the same clutch doesnt affect your chances. I hope that made sense....

[piranhaking]

If we KNEW that one out of four eggs in a clutch has the gene, then you more you buy from one clutch the better your chances would be, but since there is no guarentee that the gene is passed on to one of the eggs buying more from the same clutch doesnt affect your chances. I hope that made sense....

Very small word, very important meaning in this case sorry for the mix up, i should have done that the first time through. Did you see my other post that is out of order that goes into a little more detail on that?