Reply to comment

Vivian Cruz, Saskia Guerrier, Eurie Kim

Hypothesis
We expected that we would always find true breeders in whatever traits were crossed over and that the ratios of different traits (recessive, dominant) would follow the Punnett Square ratio.

Observations
EYE COLOR.
1) Brown --> Brown = 100% brown
2) Wildtype --> Brown = 100% wildtype
3) F1 --> F1 = 75% wildtype, 25% brown

ANTENNAE.
1) Aristepedia --> Aristepedia = 33% wildtype, 66% aristepedia
2) Wildtype --> Aristepedia = 50% wildtype, 50% aristepedia
3) F1 --> F1 = 100% wildtype

Our Story
From looking at the observations, we can tell that in the eye-color traits, brown is the recessive gene. However, in the antennae traits crossover, we see a problem.  It does not follow the ratios of the Punnett Square.  First of all, when we crossed over both aristepedia-antennae types, we ended up with some wildtypes.  But how so?  This means the parents must have had a wildtype gene, which then results in children being wildtypes.  But at the same time, if the parents had wildtype genes, the ratio should've been 3:1 (aristepedia : wildtype), but instead it was 2:1.  This means that not only is the aristepedia antennae type a dominant gene, but there are no 100% aristepedia-antennae-typed genes.  Therefore, the aristepedia trait only exists as heterozygotes.
(According to Wil, the aristepedia trait is a LETHAL DOMINANT GENE.)