Is 66% het albino a good description

[D3pro]

Can a het have a 66% chance of passing on a recessive gene? I thought they either have a 50% chance of passing on a recessive gene as with a het, or a 100% chance of passing on a recessive gene as with an Albino.

No, the end of the day it's ether a het, or it isn't.
The % only states the likeliness of an unproven animal being a het.

If a 66% het breeds and has visuals it is therefore a het.
If a 66% het breeds and has no visuals then it is a normal (certain variables apply).

Hope that helps.

i'm a big fat noob here, but after a quick reading of this i undertand it as

a 66% het, just means there is a 66% chance it carries the recessive gene. So if for example you breed a 66%het with a pure albino, and you get 50% albino offspring, then it is proven your 66% actually carries the gene so it is really a 100%

if you get no albinos from the pairing, then your 66% het does not have the gene, so it is fact a big fat 0% het. Some of the offspring would be het????

Am i close or way off the mark?

exactly

 

[snakebag]

if you get no albinos from the pairing, then your 66% het does not have the gene, so it is fact a big fat 0% het. some of the offspring would be het????
QUOTE]

All of the offspring would be het if not albino

 

[maddog-1979]

thats cleared it up for me then, thanks guys.

and to the OP question, i think if you havnt done your research to find out what the %het means then you have no-one else to blame if you want to breed albino's and dont get em

 

[snakeynewbie]

You are correct Wokka

 

[wokka]

So would 66% possible het or 25% possible het be a clearer way to describe these animals?

 

[D3pro]

yeah. But IMO anything under 50% is not worth mentioning.

 

[grimbeny]

How do you get a 25% possible het?

 

[D3pro]

How do you get a 25% possible het?

50% het to a normal = 25%
66% het to a normal = 33%

 

[wokka]

yeah. But IMO anything under 50% is not worth mentioning.

You said it earlier- It is either a Het or it is not a het. Percentages imply something which may not be there!

 

[grimbeny]

You said it earlier- It is either a Het or it is not a het. Percentages imply something which may not be there!

Exactly wokka, which is why I stand by my first post in this thread:

I think people should be 100% explicit and sell the animals with the phrase. "There is a 66 percent chance that this animal contains a gene at a locus such that if any individual carried two copies of said gene at said locus they would be albino" Even then I think some people could become confused.

 

[junglepython2]

100% het for recessive gene: 100% chance of passing on gene.
66% het for recessive gene: 66% chance . . .
50% het for recessice gene: 50% chance . . .

All the above state the likeliness that the recessive gene will pass on. If you were to just say "possible" then that is misleading. Because there is a big difference between 66% and 25% chance of the recessive gene to be passed on. The % on a recessive gene might effect sale of the animal.

QUOTE]

A 100% Het only has a 50% chance of passing on the recessive allele per offspring produced, not 100%.

Besides all that, 67% possible het would be more accurate then 66% anyway. But I agree with Wokka the term 'possible' should be included.

 

[grimbeny]

In all seriousness I think possible is the wrong word it should be chance. 67% chance of being a het.