Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Evolution reproduction

shift4101
Posts: 50
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:02:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm not challenging the notion of evolution or anything, but I have a quick question on how reproduction works with mutations.

Suppose an animal got a mutation. Would that mutation pass on to his offspring, regardless if his partner also had that mutation?

X will reproduce with X
X is born with a mutation, becomes Xa
Does Xa pass on a if he mates with another X, effectively creating another Xa?

I couldn't think of a way to word this.

I would appreciate a link.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:05:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 4:02:43 PM, shift4101 wrote:
I'm not challenging the notion of evolution or anything, but I have a quick question on how reproduction works with mutations.

Suppose an animal got a mutation. Would that mutation pass on to his offspring, regardless if his partner also had that mutation?

X will reproduce with X
X is born with a mutation, becomes Xa
Does Xa pass on a if he mates with another X, effectively creating another Xa?

I couldn't think of a way to word this.

I would appreciate a link.

This is basic genetics; just do a search of basic Mendelian genetics.

This depends on if the mutated allele is dominant or recessive and how many mutated alleles the parent has. As you read more, you will discover that sometimes multiple genes affect a single trait and sometimes some genes mask other genes through epistasis. So, the answer is maybe.
shift4101
Posts: 50
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:07:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
No, I'm not talking about punnet squares. I'm saying if a creature is born with this stub of an arm, and he mates with someone without the stub, will their offspring have the stub or not? Or could they not even mate?
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:20:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 4:07:40 PM, shift4101 wrote:
No, I'm not talking about punnet squares. I'm saying if a creature is born with this stub of an arm, and he mates with someone without the stub, will their offspring have the stub or not? Or could they not even mate?

It depends on whether the "stub" was caused by genetic or environmental factors. Mendelian genetics would still apply if it was caused by genetic factors that exist in his gametes.
shift4101
Posts: 50
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:35:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Don't they only apply to alleles?

The way I am interpreting what you are saying, that the child will have a gene with the arm and a gene without the arm?

I'm sorry, I'm not understanding what you are saying.

And it would be genetic factors yes.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:44:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 4:02:43 PM, shift4101 wrote:
I'm not challenging the notion of evolution or anything, but I have a quick question on how reproduction works with mutations.

Suppose an animal got a mutation. Would that mutation pass on to his offspring, regardless if his partner also had that mutation?

X will reproduce with X
X is born with a mutation, becomes Xa
Does Xa pass on a if he mates with another X, effectively creating another Xa?

I couldn't think of a way to word this.

I would appreciate a link.

We get half from our father, half from our mother. If your father has Xa and both his parents had Xa but your mother does not, you will definately get it. If your father has Xa but only one of his parents had Xa, you have a 1/2 chance of getting it. If the Xa gene is linked to a sex chromosome, specifically Y, and you were born a girl, then you will never get it. Thats what you seem to want to discuss, without going into too much detail about dominant/recessives.
shift4101
Posts: 50
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 5:09:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I was under the impression that human beings only had 47 (or 46, its been a while) chromozones. I couldn't imagine that every individual part of us, whether we have a thumb or not, or whether we have 5 toes or 6, depends on those chromozones. And from what I learned in biology, alleles and punnet squares like what you are both depicting only work with the chromozones.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 6:33:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 5:09:27 PM, shift4101 wrote:
I was under the impression that human beings only had 47 (or 46, its been a while) chromozones. I couldn't imagine that every individual part of us, whether we have a thumb or not, or whether we have 5 toes or 6, depends on those chromozones. And from what I learned in biology, alleles and punnet squares like what you are both depicting only work with the chromozones.

46, and if you have down syndrome, 47. Yes, alleles and punnet squares apply to chromosomes. Yes, the genetic information is trapped within those 23 pairs of chromosomes. Its the same as saying, "I cant believe i can access the entirety of the collective human knowledge from this small laptop no larger than a textbook".