Dominance, Incomplete Dominance, Co-Dominance

Pea plants-
My hypothesis was: I think that the purple pea plants would be dominant. I was rite because the purple pea plant was pure bread so the offspring would be 50%.

Snapdragon Plants-
The red and white flowers where incomplete dominance. When you combined the read and white flowers, they blended giving pink so it would not be dominant or recessive.

Lentil plants-
These plants would be co-dominant. so if 2 doted plants went together they would give only doted plants. If 2 none doted plants but with 4 brown big dots on them the would give the same, but if you put a plants that was doted and had 4 brown big dot on them it would result with one like its self, with one just doted and with one with 4 brown big dots.

GATTACA- Reflection

Click here to watch the trailer.
Click here to watch the movie.

Reflection on GATTACA

3. Jerome and Vincent are 2 total different people who act as one. All Vincent wants is so succeed, at the end he finally does because he never gave up. His dream is all that maters to him, and does the best he can to succeed and get to his goal. On the other hand, Jerome is known as perfect, but he doesn't believe this. In my opinion they are 2 different total humans.

4. I do not believe that Jerome was mentally ill. I think that he knew that with what he has done with life, it was too late to do anything with it so he would rather give his opportunity to someone else. I think he was tired of everyone telling him that he has done so well and now its time do to something with his talent.

18. I believe that cloning is wrong. Why would you want to clone your self? People are who they are, and if you cant have a child, then adopt one, there are over a 1000 kids waiting for people to adopt them, and more than have of them never get to live with parents. People have to start noticing that life is not always perfect. And every human being is unique, if you where to clone your self then you wouldn't be unique. Is that what you want? I don't think so, there is no use in cloning your self, and what if you where in big trouble, and you cloned your self, it would probably cause more trouble. I'm just saying, make the right choice people, and think before doing something stupid!






How is Cracking the Code of life and GATTACA similar and Different?

Well first off all we know that one is Fiction and the other non-fiction. When watching both of the movies, it was still confusing in some parts of the movie. It made me wonder about Cloning and why people would want to clone themselves or others. The characters in each movie were interesting. I believe that the movie Cracking the code of life explained the basics of DNA while GATTACA went a step further into cloning other people's DNA. In my opinion i enjoyed GATTACA more even if i did not understand parts of the movie i would still recommend this movie more than Cracking the code of life.

Cracking the Code of Life

1. If i had the chance to be tested to check if i had a disease i would. I would want to find out if there would be a cure or not. If i where a baby and i was still in the tummy of my mummy i would not want to be killed because of a problem i might have. Id want to be able to live as long as i could. In the movie they said it took them 1 year to get all 1000 letters for the DNA. 

2.  If i were asked to be in DNA study i might say yes. Depending on what they do to me, if i were older and wouldnt cry to shots than i would probably, but i hate shots and cry every time i have to get them. If they where to find a gene which would tell that i might have a deseas sometime in the furture i would want to be informed, because i might have the chance to cure it in time. 

3.  If you would not want many people to know about your DNA, you should keep it private and not share it with too many people. Also scientists who know a lot about DNA should teach it to others so they can learn about it and see how they maybe in the future could help other people. 

Lab - Genetic Crosses

Punit Squares
Guiding Question:
How can you predict the possible results of genetic crosses?
Hypothesis: Throught the Punit squares, it is usually
Data Table 1:

Trial	Allele From Bag 1 (Female Parent)	Allele From Bag 2 (Male Parent)	Offsprings Alleles
1	B	b	Bb
2	B	b	Bb
3	B	b	Bb
4	B	b	Bb
5	B	b	Bb
6	B	b	Bb
7	B	b	Bb
8	B	b	Bb
9	B	b	Bb
10	B	b	Bb

Data Table 2:

Trial	Allele From Bag 1 (Female Parent)	Allele From Bag 2 (Male Parent)	Offsprings Alleles
1	B	B	BB
2	B	b	Bb
3	B	B	BB
4	B	b	Bb
5	B	b	Bb
6	B	B	BB
7	B	b	Bb
8	B	b	Bb
9	B	b	Bb
10	B	B	BB

Data Table 3:

Trial	Allele From Bag 1 (Female Parent)	Allele From Bag 2 (Male Parent)	Offsprings Alleles
1	B	b	Bb
2	B	B	BB
3	B	b	Bb
4	B	b	Bb
5	B	B	BB
6	b	B	bB
7	B	B	BB
8	B	b	Bb
9	b	B	bB
10	B	b	Bb

Analyzing Data:
Step 1 Punnet Squares:

2 Homozygous Parents	B	B
b	Bb	Bb
b	Bb	Bb

Heterozygous & Homozygous Parents	B	B
B	BB	BB
B	Bb	Bb

Heterozygous Parents	B	b
B	BB	Bb
b	Bb	bb

Step 2:
According to your results in Part 1, how many diffrent kinds of offspring are possible when the homozygous parents(BB and bb) are crossed? Do the results you obtained using the marble model agree with the results shown by a Punnett square?

In each of our tables and tests we scored the exact same precent of getting the same offspring in alleles. In the first table there is 100% of getting a Bb offspring, but also in our punnent squares the final product was 100% me and my partner agree that this proves that in this case the punnet square method is correct.

Step 3:
According to your results in Part 2, what percentage of offspring are likely to be homozygous when a homozygous parent (BB) and a heterozygous parent (Bb) are crossed? What percentage of offspring are likely to be heterozygous? Does the model agree with the results shown by a Punnett square?

In the second graph that me and my partner recorded we ran into a bit of trouble, acourding to our table we got 4 BB out of 10 tries which means we had 40% chance of getting BB offspring the problem was that according to our punnet squares their should be 50% chance of getting BB offspring. The reason this happened is that the punnet squares are statistics but nature is chance, when we made the table we picked out of a bag therefor that is chance, but the punnet square has to be one answer, even though we only got 4/10 BB  it is very close to 50% which still proves that the punnet method is fairly reliable.

Step 4:
According to your results in Part 3, what diffrent kinds of offspring are possible when two heterozygous parents (BbxBb) are crossed? What percentage of each type of offspring are likely to be produced? Does the model agree with the results of a Punnett square?

In this last data table again we pulled out of a bag, which again gives us chance of anything happening, and as we guessed it, something did according to statistics or the punnet squares there should be a 50% chance of getting the Bb, 25% chance for getting an offspring BB, and a 25% chance of getting an offspring of bb, but because of life's chance we got 80% of the Bb offspring and 20% chance of getting the BB offspring, this is again because of life, but it does show that the punnet square was close and is reliable.

Step 5:
For Part 3, if you did 100 trails instead of 10 trails, would your results be closer to the results shown in a punnett square? Explain.

You can never know for sure if the results can be the same because of chance, but you can know for sure that trying it 100 is a lot more reliable and secure than it would be if you only took 10 tests, obviously because of this you would have more Data and statistics.

Step 6:
In a paragraph, explain how the marble model compares with a Punnett square. How are the two methods alike? How are they different?

Both methods are extremely simulare and both of them represents the probability for an offspring, and a inheritance trait from parents. Even though this is true, there are some major differences, for example the punnet squares the probability of a genotype, and represents the percentage of getting a certain trait, against the marble method which shows a real life example and provides chance.