Which Is More Superior Dominate Or Recessive Gene's. And Explain Why.?
594586
Well, I tend to agree with the other post on this...I wouldn't call a gene "superior" because it's dominant or recessive.  (Red hair, is, by the way, recessive!  I'm a redhead!)  A dominant allele need only be present for the trait to be apparent, that is, it can carry a recessive gene, but will show the traits of the dominant gene.  However, even though a trait is dominant, does not mean that it is the most common.  Take blood type, for example.  The O blood type is completely recessive, yet it is the most common, so I wouldn't really say that either of them are "superior".
313398
There is no "versus". Mendelian Genetics explained heredity years before when people had funny ideas about inheritance (there was one which said only the father contributed to the children's character and another which said it was the mum!). Biotechnology is using this knowledge as well as knowledge from diverse fields such as Chemistry, Physics, Statistics etc. to modify nature a little for man's benefit. Why the  "versus" question? Both work in tandem.
576339
Defination of epistasis - A double mutant where one mutation masks the phenotype of another mutation.\n\nNote that epistasis is not the same thing as dominance. With epistasis a mutation in one gene masks the expression of a different gene. With dominance, one allele of a gene masks the expression of another allele of the same gene.\n\nFor instance, a mutant gene that causes complete baldness would be epistatic to a mutant gene that determines hair color. Likewise, a mutation preventing an early step in a biochemical pathway will be epistatic to a mutation that prevents a step later in the same pathway (that is, an "upstream" mutant phenotype will obscure a "downstream" mutant phenotype). Two examples of how tests of epistasis can be used to analyze biochemical reactions are shown below. \n\n\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nQUESTION: Two mutations were isolated with different effects on proline utilization: the mutation put-1020 makes cells constitutively express the putP gene at high levels, while the mutation put-1222 prevents expression of the putP gene. To determine if these two mutations affect different "regulatory pathways" or if they both affect the same "regulatory pathway", the double mutant was constructed. The phenotype of the put-1020 put-1222 double mutant is constitutive expression of the putP gene. Suggest a simple explanation for these results. What results would you expect if the two mutations affected different pathways? \n\nANSWER: The put-1020 is epistatic to put-1222. The simplest explanation of these results is that both the put-1020 mutation and the put-1222 mutation affect the same regulatory pathway. If the two mutations affected independent regulatory pathways then the phenotype of the double mutant would probably be intermediate between the two extremes observed in the single mutants. \ncontinues here:\nhttp://www.sci.sdsu.edu/~smaloy/MicrobialGenetics/topics/genetic-analysis/epistasis.html
490930
black or white or any other color in dominate/recesive genes. Its a gamble really.
821121
Because dominant mutations will be selected against.  Keep in mind for all dominant mutations, a phenotype will be expressed, and in a lot of these cases, the gene may not be passed on because the affected person may not be able to reproduce (or will be dead before he/she can reproduce). \n\nRecessive mutations can be carried without expressing a phenotype, so unless both alleles are mutated, no phenotype will be expressed.
241930
Mendel's law of dominance\nIn a cross of parents that are pure for contrasting traits, only one form of the trait will appear in the next generation. Offspring that are hybrid for a trait will have only the dominant trait in the phenotype. \n[edit]\nMendel's law of segregation\n \nFigure 3 : The color alleles of Mirabilis jalapa are not dominant or recessive.\n(1) Parental generation. (2) F1 generation. (3) F2 generation. The "red" and "white" allele together make a "pink" phenotype, resulting in a 1:2:1 ratio of red:pink:white in the F2 generation. \nFigure 1 : Dominant and recessive phenotypes.\n(1) Parental generation. (2) F1 generation. (3) F2 generation. Dominant (red) and recessive (white) phenotype look alike in the F1 (first) generation and show a 3:1 ratio in the F2 (second) generationMendel's law of segregation, also known as Mendel's first law, essentially has four parts.\n\nAlternative versions of genes account for variations in inherited characters. This is the concept of alleles. Alleles are different versions of genes that impart the same characteristic. Each human has a gene that controls eye color, but there are variations among these genes in accordance with the specific color the gene "codes" for. \nFor each characteristic, an organism inherits two genes, one from each parent. This means that when somatic cells are produced from two gametes, one allele comes from the mother, one from the father. These alleles may be the same (true-breeding organisms, e.g. ww and rr in Fig. 3), or different (hybrids, e.g. wr in Fig. 3). \nIf the two alleles differ, then one, the dominant allele, is fully expressed in the organism's appearance; the other, the recessive allele, has no noticeable effect on the organism's appearance. In other words, the dominant allele is expressed in the phenotype of the organism. However this does not always hold true: Today, we know several examples that disprove this "law", e.g. Mirabilis jalapa, the "Japanese wonder flower" (Fig. 3). This is called incomplete dominance. There is also codominance on a molecular level, e.g. people with sickle cell anemia, when normal and sickle-shaped red blood cells mix and prevent malaria. \nThe two genes for each character segregate during gamete production. This is the last part of Mendel's generalization. The two alleles of the organism are separated into different gametes, ensuring variation. \nDuring his experiments, Mendel encountered some traits that did not follow the laws he had encountered. These traits did not appear independently, but always together with at least one other trait. Mendel could not explain what happened and chose not to mention it in his work. Today, we know that these traits are linked on the same chromosome.\n\n[edit]\nMendel's law of independent assortment\nAlso known as Mendel's Second Law \nThe most important principle of Mendel's law of independent assortment is that the emergence of one trait will not affect the emergence of another. While his experiments with mixing one trait always resulted in a 3:1 ratio (Fig. 1) between dominant and recessive phenotypes, his experiments with mixing two traits showed 9:3:3:1 ratios (Fig. 2). Mendel concluded that each organism carries two sets of information about its phenotype. If the two sets differ on the same phenotype, one of them dominates the other. That way, information can be passed on through the generations, even if the phenotype is not expressed (F1 generations, figures 1 and 2).\n\nMendel's findings allowed other scientists to simplify the emergence of traits to mathematical probability. A large portion of Mendel's findings can be traced to his choice to start his experiments only with true breeding plants. He also only measured absolute characteristics such as color, shape, and position of the offspring. His data was expressed numerically and subjected to statistical
187575
Dominant traits are expressed in an offspring whether the individual has alleles Rr or RR while recessive is only expressed in rr individuals\n\nEven though an individual might have one r and one R, they will still exhibit dominant traits because it is a dominant allele
265336
First generation was two dominants (LL) crossed with two reccisive genes (ll). Except for mutations the next generation would give 100% heterozygous (Ll). These plants would show only dominant charateristics. Upon crossing the heterozygous plants, appx. 25% of the next generation would be (ll) causing the expression of a short plant.
251834
mendel tested genes in peas. he cross bred smooth and wrinkled peas and found that all the offspring grew smooth. then he bred the offspring and they grew some smooth and some wrikled at a ratio of 3:1.\nthis maade him think about dominance, in this case, the smooth allele was dominant to the wrinkled allele. he also did work on smooth gen peas and wrinkled yellow peas. When he bred these, he found a ratio of 9(sreen smooth):3(green wrinlked):3(yellow smooth):1(yellow winkled). this showeed him that the green and smooth alleles were dominant to yellow and wrinkled.\nhe deided that the rules of breeding ratios would either be 9:3:3:1,3:1,2:1, or 1:1 when dealing with dominance
166266
The gene that'll mask a recessive one is called as Dominant gene. \nEx: \n  The genes responsible for the tallness of Pea plant are \nT & t.\nT= Dominant gene.\nt= Recessive gene.\nPresence of one T gene makes the plant to be taller.
901776
It is E\n\nThe reason: \na) Reproductive variations lead to the "better producer" making more offspring and thus leading to more chances for their offspring to reproduce.  For this one, think of gorillas...the dominant Male (silverback) will mate with the females so it is his offspring who carry the genetics into the next generation, and the other males in the group dont pass on their genes. \n\nb) There has to be some offspring that simply don't survive...this is the whole "don't interfere and let nature take its course" thing.  This means that after the "unhealthy" individuals die, the rest (on average) will be better suited to their environment.  Think of it like this... a  human family has three babies but one of them dies; the one that died may have had a defect that shouldn't have been passed on.  Since the parents had two other babies, they have replaced themselves in the population so there will not be a net loss of population when they eventually die. \n\nc) There has to be variations in the genetics of the offspring.  This is due to the fact that for us to become better suited to our environment, there has to be a change in our genetics to produce that change.  If we were exactly like our parents, no changes could occur.\n\nd) Inheritance is hugely important.  Think about it like this: If a beneficial change develops (such as opposable thumbs), what good would it be if it couldnt be passed on to the next generation?  There must be a mechanism to pass the benefit on.  \n\ne) Even though there have been many catastrophic events that have allowed for natural selection, it is not required.  A large eruption may cause the animals who can eat more diverse variety of plants to do better than ones that can't but they may be able to out-compete the other animals anyway.
425063
2 recessive alleles - Homozygotes
265916
Complete Dominance is when one genetics trait completely supresses the other. For example if a red bug mates with a green bug and the offspring produced is red, then one would say that the trait of the red bug is in complete dominance because the offspring is neither green nor does it show a mixture of red and green.\nHope this helps!
344293
yes which genes you inherit can go either way. White people can carry recessive black genes and vice versa
942552
both parents.  Generally, the sex-linked recessive genes are on the X chromosome.  She would have two recessive genes, meaning she had to get a recessive gene from each parent in order to have that phenotype.  The above information is incorrect- sex-linked recessive disorders actually occur more often in men than women because men don't have another X chromosome to nullify the recessive gene.
153903
Epistasis refers to the phenomenon where one or more genes will mask the effects of another gene in a different position on a chromosome (or locus). This shouldn't be confused with dominance though where the interaction takes place in the same locus.\n\nSimple Example: The gene that causes Albinism hides the gene controlling the color of a person's hair.\n\nAnother Example: Bombay Phenotype - This involves the ABO Blood group system. They lack a protein called the H antigen which is used to form the A and B antigens. So even though they may have A or B genes, they appear to be blood group O because of the lack of H antigens.
833631
Since you haven't given the context, you could be right...\n\nY is dominant to y.\nIt may well be that Y (green) is dominant to y (yellow), since often genes are name after what happens when they don't work.  The gene that causes fruitflies to have red eyes is actually called "white".  Stupid, huh?  W (red) is dominant to w (white).  Hope I haven't confused you.