Yes, exactly - is it replicable (which may need several further litters depending on your thoughts on linebreeding).
Then I would imagine they would see how it replicates (dominant, recessive, linked, etc), they usually then give it a token name for starters - something that fits the bill from what they know to be the most likely thing from those first few pairings (such as G in gerbils).
Then they would see how it affected the hair itself (what colours were missing, which colours expanded or shrank and try to find another gene that acted the same way in another animal. In other animals - sometimes a new gene can be interacted with existing genes to see if it follow a prescriptive pattern for example (such a pp with A* makes ginger, but pp with aa makes silver).
Generally they try to keep the final 'gene' that same in all the fancies and often will have to change a name if it were to cause confusion. I would imagine in a doop this could then change if it reacts to any further genes found in a different way.
But yes, seeing as it is the first time a potential new colour has appeared in doops, I have no idea on what wil actually happen?
I wonder if our resident genetics expert Shooting Star could help us out?
Post by Shooting Star on Apr 10, 2021 8:35:57 GMT -8
The pic has been shared as being from "somewhere in the UK", but no other info. From the photo, it appears to be something akin to chinchilla, a C-locus mutation that's not present in gerbils to date. Chinchilla doesn't cause dark points, but rather strips phaeomelanin (yellow-red pigment) from the entire coat while leaving dark eyes and ticking.
For actual identification, they'd have to do test-breeding and ideally look at hairs under a microscope.
Yes, they certainly have a certain quality about them don't they?
Interesting that there are two in the litter though - I wonder if that means anything specific about the way it is inherited if there is more than 1 of them?
I was thinking if it was a one off congenital mutation - like a chimera - wouldn't it have only been in one pup? Even a recessive gene alone is usually 1 in 4 - not 2 in 4 - but I know they are only probabilities - not 'actual' figures so maybe not so relevant. Also a dominant gene would have had to have shown in one of the parents too - as it is unlikey they both become the first dominant ones together (unless you can get identical twins with rodents?).
Am I just clutching at straws Shooting Star? I know patience is a virtue - but I like to try to talk things around sometimes?
Post by Shooting Star on Apr 15, 2021 3:29:11 GMT -8
With two of the new color in one litter, it's most likely a recessive mutation carried by both parents. It is certainly possible that it's a new dominant mutation that first appeared in a set of identical twins, but far less likely.