Maxwell Grantly

Magical stories from an independent author

Nest Analyst

Those familiar with the breeding of Ozimals bunnies will know that their traits are not passed on using the classical gene model. Although Ozimals refer to a dominant and recessive list for eye and fur colours in their wiki, sometimes a dominant trait may be masked by a more recessive one.

(Quote = “Before launch of the bunnies traits were divided into two categories. One being Dominant and one being Recessive. This list is weighted in FirstGen nests starting at 1 and going to the max number of genetics for that category. This means that having a chance to get the top level recessive genes in the list is much harder than getting the lower level Dominant genes. This makes the game challenging but fair for all that play.

Each genetic that is in the Recessive list must be in both parents you are breeding to have a chance at getting an elite. That means the Fur and Eyes genetics both parents have must be in the Recessive list.”)

This means that it is incredibly difficult to assess the outcomes of various trait combinations because there are no additional clues on the way that traits are shown.

For example, if you see a Holland Lop White rabbit in world, is the dominant gene a Holland Lop White gene (as you may expect) or is the dominant gene being masked by a more recessive one?

When it comes to the construction of a classical Punnett Square, how it is possible to accommodate the fact that a recessive gene may sometimes appear in dominance to a more dominant one?

Although I do not wish to advocate that I have any stronger clues than other rabbit breeders about the process of determination offspring outcome, I began to ponder upon the problem of how this Ozimal discrepancy can be accommodated within the use of a typical Punnett Square. Simply as a mathematical exercise, I wondered whether the classical Punnett Square could be adjusted to allow for this feature. I wondered whether the two-by-two Punnett Square could be adapted by embedding four smaller two-by-two Punnett Squares within each quadrant to create a new four-by-four embedded Punnett Square. The larger two-by-two Punnett Square could be used to record which traits are passed onto the offspring and the four smaller two-by-two Punnett Squares that exist in each quadrant could be used to record which traits are then shown in the final kindled bunny. I called this method “The Embedded Punnett Square” and then applied the laws of classical probability to its construction.

In total, there are sixteen sections in the Embedded Punnet Square but sadly, any Ozimal bunny has only fifteen generations. For the purpose of rounding and avoiding decimal answers in the following calculations, I have made a small approximation that each rabbit has sixteen generations in total. Therefore, each entry in the Embedded Punnet Square can be thought of as one of the produced nests from a mating. If you prefer exact calculations, simply multiply any of the following numbers in the following outcomes by 16/15 to correct this approximation.

Those of you who know my rabbit breeding methods will understand that I prefer to use identical pairings. That is, for example, I will breed one Havana Blacks (with Garnet eyes) with another Havana Black (with Garnet eyes.) This is the way that the following calculations have been processed.

So, to apply this nest analyst, simply allow a pair of identical bunnies to breed until all their fifteen generations have been exhausted and you have fifteen sets of data to analyse. Simply scan through the following outcomes and find the set of data that most closely resembles your outcome. The additional notes should provide the most likely explanation for your data.

… and now, onto the main article …

——————————————————————————————

Drilling Analyst Tables:

(Important: To make the mathematics easier to calculate, I have assumed that each rabbit produces a total of sixteen nests. (Simply because sixteen is made from two to the power of four, that is, 2 x 2 x 2 x 2) If you should require the exact answer, multiply any of the following totals in the following outcomes by 16/15 to convert.

Again, the most useful information can be drawn by breeding identical siblings. I hope that we may continue to do this. Consider the eye colour and fur type separately. That is, the word “trait” can refer to eye colour or fur type in the following six outcomes.)

(1) If no nest shows a new trait. They only show their parents’ traits.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in all 16 nests

Conclusion: It is highly likely that the parents were homogeneous. No useful inference may be drawn from the data. Repeat the next experiment with the same trait, but drawn from a different source. Approach a different breeder or vendor in the next experiment.

(2) If the produced nests show one new trait, as well as their parents’ traits.

Conclusion: It is highly likely that one parent was homogeneous and one parent was heterogeneous. There are two possible outcomes.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in 14 nests
There is a New Trait shown in 2 nests

Conclusion: The heterogeneous rabbit was showing the dominant trait. The new trait was recessive in that parent. Use the new trait.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in 10 nests
There is a New Trait shown in 6 nests

Conclusion: The heterogeneous rabbit was showing the recessive trait. The new trait was actually dominant. Do not use it. Revert to the parents’ traits in the next experiment. Do not use the new trait.

(3) If the produced nests show two new traits, as well as their parents traits.

Conclusion: It is certain that both parents were heterogeneous. There are three possible outcomes.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in 10 nests
There is a Second Trait shown in 4 nests
There is also a Third Trait shown in 2 nests

Conclusion: Both parents had the dominant gene showing. Both new traits are more recessive. However, the third trait is the most recessive and is the one that should be used.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in 8 nests
There is a Second Trait shown in 6 nests
There is also a Third Trait shown in 2 nests

Conclusion: One parent was actually displaying the recessive gene. The second trait is actually the most dominant and the third trait is the most recessive. Use the third trait.

The Parents’ Trait is shown in only 6 nests
There is a Second Trait shown in 6 nests
There is also a Third Trait shown in 4 nests

Conclusion: Both parents were actually displaying their recessive genes. The second and third traits are actually more dominant, the second trait being more dominant than the third. Revert to the parents’ traits in the next experiment. Do not use the new traits.

Advertisements

Single Post Navigation

4 thoughts on “Nest Analyst

  1. thisboysslife on said:

    Well stated, very clear and concise. Needless to say, I love the charts, and the explanation helps to further understand our project. You are my brilliant big brother! Thank you for writing this up Maxwell. Your little brother apprentice appreciates it. (smiles excitedly)

  2. thisboysslife on said:

    The only question I have is what if the charts flow in the opposite direction. (e.g. Zinnia is one of the most recessive eyes; Tan Chocolate is one of the most recessive furs.) Maybe a silly question that will just get a simple answer from my big brother, but I still wonder how we know which direction the arrows are flowing. Maybe we started revealing dominants. And another question…how come we didn’t leave dark grey and light green in their original positions in the chart. If the chart flowed the other direction, would they stay in their original positions?
    I love our project. (…sits and ponders the beautiful charts…)

  3. The answer to your first question is:

    Mister Malk explained that some of the links on our chart were incorrect because we used a classical genetic model and not an Ozimal genetic model. Therefore, the only links that we can be “pretty” sure about are those we have done since speaking with him, by analysing the whole set of 15 nests. He did confirm that there were problems in our original chart (because we used a classical model) but I left the original chart in the diagram because an answer nearly correct is better than no answer at all. However, the only links we have confirmed are those highlighted in yellow.

    To answer your second question. We knew that dark grey and light green were incorrectly placed because we had used a classical model and our more detailed last results from Lucky and Silver were more reliable. I moved these two results to correct an earlier mistake because our later results (which were more reliable than our earlier ones) demonstrated that they should be altered. The chart does, I am sure, still contain a small number of other errors. When these come to light, I will amend them as we proceed. Basically, now that we know that recessive genes can be shown over dominant genes, we can use this additional information to correct any earlier misunderstandings when we find them.

    Our chart is “pretty” much correct but does contain errors. When any errors come to light, we can correct them as we proceed. However, I would prefer to keep our data from the past two years as it is better than ditching it all and starting the whole project afresh from nothing.

  4. To apply this nest analyst, simply allow a pair of identical bunnies to breed until all their fifteen generations have been exhausted and you have fifteen new sets of nest data to analyse. Simply scan through the following outcomes and find the set of nest data that most closely resembles your own outcome. The additional notes that follow should provide the most likely explanation for your data.

    For example, suppose you pair two Dutch Blacks parents and, after several months, you eventually obtain fourteen Dutch Black nests and one Mini Rex Black Otter Nest. If you scan through the article, the set of outcomes which most closely resembles your own data (within acceptable limits of approximation) is the following:

    “The Parents’ Trait is shown in 14 nests

    There is a New Trait shown in 2 nests”

    Therefore the notes that would apply to you would be the following:

    “Conclusion: The heterogeneous rabbit was showing the dominant trait. The new trait was recessive in that parent. Use the new trait.”

    This means that the most likely outcome from this set of data is that one of the original Dutch Black parents was homogenous and the second Dutch Black parent was heterogeneous, with the Mini Rex Black Otter trait being recessive and masked by the more dominant Dutch Black trait. If you were to want to drill to obtain a more recessive trait, using this method, you would create a new pairing of two Mini Rex Black Otter parents in your new breeding partnership.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: