If a brother & sister were born of a brother and sister, what would their DNA look like? Would it be obvious?

Question

I'm a mystery writer. Would love an explanation in layman's terms. Give me just enough medical jargon to sound like I know what I'm talking about! I like to encourage my readers to do further research on stuff from my books. Thanks to any and all who answer.

Answer 1

Are you really talking about a brother-sister pair marrying each other and having two children, one boy and one girl? If so, DNA testing could show that this happened. Yes, there is genetic risk for diseases and malformations which are normally recessive. The risk increases with each succesive such generation. I would portray those doing the genetic testing as getting very confused!

If my identical twin brother married my wife's identical twin sister, no DNA testing would be able to distinguish between my children and theirs. Or perhaps they could, if I developed a genetic defect after birth. I don't know if that can happen. But in fiction, it can happen if you want it to.

Answer 2

ecolink is right however I'm not sure he answered what you asked. If I understand you right you mean to ask would a brother and sister that were the product of inbreeding (their parents had been brother and sister) would their be something distinct in their DNA to note the fact or would their DNA be more similiar? Unfortunately if that is what you ask then No, not really. Inbreeding is a poorely understood concept do to it's taboo nature. Inbreeding raises a slightly higher chance of reinforcing negative genes, although it also raises the chance of reinforcing positive ones. (positive and negative based on survival charachteristics) Also as ecolink mentioned how the chromosones get arranged is random, for this reason the level of relation and similiarity in dna could very drastically between different sets of inbred kids. Thier DNA would apear like normal human dna. DNA isn't damaged by inbreeding. A sub-normal inbreed, one that has a defect that was brought out through the mating would have that defect coded in their DNA but that defect would also occur in non-inbred individuals. So again the DNA in that case wouldn't be anything special. Hope that helps

Answer 3

The DNA of the children would be obviously related in a DNA test, but not necessarily obvious in the children's physical appearance.

The gametes (reproductive cells) from each parent include one of each of the homologous pairs of chromosome, but the homologous chromosomes separate randomly. That's Mendel's law of independent assortment. It's just like sorting 23 pairs of shoes into two laundry baskets. You pick up a pair of shoes and toss one shoe into each basket, but it doesn't matter where you toss the left shoe or the right shoe. That part is random. I'm going to say that if you divide up the 23 pairs of shoes that way then I divide them up, the way you divide them is not the same way I'd divide them.

Answer 4

i'm actual born of God. The Greek word contained in the 4th Revised version - "gegenneetai" - is third man or woman, plural, suitable, center/passive voice, which potential "you (plural) were born/begotten"; we are children of God, and he's our Father. This actually links in to Jesus' communicate/arguments with the Pharisees, even as Jesus says that their father is the devil, and He follows His Father. between the justifications that many contained in the west may be extra comfortable with the translation "adoption"/"followed" is an aversion to being appropriate instantly with God, on condition that we are "sinners, nonetheless" in a large number of techniques and union with God ought to impression the single-ness of God, which the West emphasised. This union with God, theosis, is even if embraced via the jap church extra without difficulty and mystically, which targeted extra on the three-ness of God, and how God the daddy brings us into instantly ahead union ("Communion") with Him in Christ via the flexibility of the Holy Spirit. lots of the push decrease back that you're growing on lots of the solutions the following is because you make the most of the word "begotten", and that touches upon the Nicene Creed, which states that Jesus Christ is "the in straightforward words begotten Son of God, gentle from gentle, authentic God from authentic God, begotten no longer made, of one being with the daddy". some are taking "begotten" and forgetting that even the smart bishops at Nicea needed extremely some words to modify "begotten" as a fashion to distinguish how Jesus Christ is fairly begotten somewhat than begotten in a human, organic and organic way. This replaced into needed on the time because the Arians believed that Jesus' existence in straightforward words all started at his theory in Mary, and replaced into no longer continuously without end pre-existent as God the Son.