If a mother was 75% positive for a specific mutated gene, and the father was 25%, and the mother's father or mother was 50%, and the great-grandparents were 25% and the great-great grandparents were 100%, would this be correct to have a child that came full circle and was now 100% of the specific mutated gene in their DNA? I guess the gene would be dominant and not recessive.
2006-06-22 20:12:03 · 2 answers · asked by ^..^ALUKAH^..^ 4 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
in old theoryit might seem that way, but not in real science. many genes and mutations can occurr without any generations having it or even skip generations. the structures of dna and genes have just been discovered to have millions of chromozones in each gene. enviroment has alot to do with genetics also. i have what is called factor v lieden. its a very rare mutation in my dna genes which causes blood clots all the time. at the va hospital, i found i was one of four known in the va system by the chief of staff to have it. they checked for genetics at first but no one in my family ever had a blood clot. just as in aids. there have been many children born from parents who were hiv and never got it. in your theory, the child could get nothing or the fathers 25 %. at what percent were the great, great grandparents. both 100 % or 50/50? the child could also get the great grandparents percentage which is the fathers. even with the mother at 75 and the father at 25. the child could get nothing, the fathers 25 percent or half of his or half of the mothers or half of both.
2006-06-22 20:33:13 · answer #1 · answered by hollywood71@verizon.net 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is a universe of invariants. No question of mutation
2006-06-23 04:16:09 · answer #2 · answered by The Knowledge Server 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋