A genetic problem .... im not sure if im doing this correct.

Genetics as it applies to evolution, molecular biology, and medical aspects.

Moderators: Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
xcuteJinax3
Garter
Garter
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:31 am

A genetic problem .... im not sure if im doing this correct.

Post by xcuteJinax3 » Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:55 am

A black stallion of unknown ancestry was mated to anumber of red mares with purebred pedigrees. These matings produced 20 red offspring and 25 black offspring. Test using the chi-square method indicating whether the hypothesis is acceptable.


---------------

Okay .. I used a punnet square firstly ... I figured that the black stallion would b dominant so that would be BB, and the red mares since they are purebred, they would be bb.

Bb x bb getting a 1:1 ratio (total 2). I saw that the total progeny would be 45, so I got ..... (1/2)*(45) =22.5, then i used the chi square formula ...

(Observed-expected)^2/expected...


[(20-22.5)^2/ 22.5] + [(25-22.5)^2/ 22.5)]



------------

I'm not sure if my steps are correct at all so can someone please see if I am doing this correctlY? Thanks soo much!

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:06 am

Seems Ok up to the end, but you haven't finish the job. You have to calculate the table coefficient and compare it to your chi sqaure table to tell you if your difference from expeted is significant or not.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

xcuteJinax3
Garter
Garter
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:31 am

Post by xcuteJinax3 » Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:37 am

Canalon wrote:Seems Ok up to the end, but you haven't finish the job. You have to calculate the table coefficient and compare it to your chi sqaure table to tell you if your difference from expeted is significant or not.



So is the ratio 1:1? That's the part I'm mainly not sure of. :?

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:49 am

That would be your Null hypothesis. A simple gene with a dominant recessive pattern. Your Chi square will tell you if you have to reject or accept it.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests