wordpress-seo domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/intelligentwr/nursingassignmentcrackers/wp-includes/functions.php on line 61141. You are observing a species of mice in which brown fur color is dominant to white fur color. When a brown mouse is crossed with a white mouse, all of their offspring have brown fur. Why did none of the offspring have white fur? 2. Can a person\u2019s genotype be determined by their phenotype? Why or why not? 3. Are incomplete dominant and co-dominant patterns of inheritance found in human traits? If yes, give examples of each. 4. Consider the following genotype: Yy Ss Hh. a. How many different gamete combinations can be produced? b. Many traits (phenotypes), like eye color, are controlled by multiple genes. If eye color were controlled by the number of genes indicated below, how many possible genotype combinations would there be in the following scenarios? i. 5 Eye Color Genes: ii. 10 Eye Color Genes: iii. 20 Eye Color Genes: \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics EXPERIMENT 1: PUNNETT SQUARE CROSSES Part 1: Post-Lab Questions 1. Set up and complete Punnett squares for these crosses (remember Y = yellow, y = blue): a. YY and Yy b. YY and yy 2. Answer these questions: a. What are the resulting phenotypes? b. Are there any blue kernels? c. How can you tell whether or not there are blue kernels? 3. Set up and complete a Punnett square for a cross of two of the F1 from Step 1 (above). 4. Answer these questions: a. What are the genotypes of the F2 generation? b. What are their phenotypes? c. Are there more or fewer blue kernels than in the F1 generation? 5. Identify the four possible gametes produced by the following individuals (S = smooth, s = wrinkled): a. YY Ss: \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics b. Yy Ss: c. Create a Punnett square using these gametes as P1 and determine the genotypes of the F1. d. What are the phenotypes? What is the ratio of those phenotypes? \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics Part 2: Data Tables Table 1: Parent Genotypes: Monohybrid Crosses Generation Genotype of Individual #1 Genotype of Individual #2 P P1 P2 P3 P4 Table 2: Generation Data Produced by Monohybrid Crosses Generation Possible Offspring Genotypes Possible Offspring Phenotypes Genotype Ratio Phenotype Ratio P P1 P2 P3 P4 Part 2: Post-Lab Questions 1. How much genotypic variation do you find in the randomly picked parents of your crosses? 2. How much in the offspring? 3. Pool all of the offspring from your five replicates. How much phenotypic variation do you find? 4. Is the ratio of observed phenotypes the same as the ratio of predicted phenotypes? Why or why not? 5. What is the difference between genes and alleles? \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics 6. How might protein synthesis execute differently if a mutation occurs? 7. Organisms heterozygous for a recessive trait are often called carriers of that trait. What does that mean? 8. In peas, green pods (G) are dominant over yellow pods. If a homozygous dominant plant is crossed with a homozygous recessive plant, what will be the phenotype of the F1 generation? If two plants from the F1 generation are crossed, what will the phenotype of their offspring be? \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics Part 3: Data Tables Table 3: Parent Genotypes: Dihybrid Crosses Generation Genotype of Individual #1 Genotype of Individual #2 P P1 P2 P3 P4 Table 4: Generation Data Produced by Dihybrid Crosses Generation Possible Offspring Genotypes Possible Offspring Phenotypes Genotype Ratio Phenotype Ratio P P1 P2 P3 P4 Part 3: Post-Lab Questions 1. How similar are the observed phenotypes in each replicate? 2. How similar are they if you pool your data from each of the five replicates? 3. Is it closer or further from your prediction? 4. Did the results from the monohybrid or dihybrid cross most closely match your predicted ratio of phenotypes? 5. Based on these results, what would you expect if you were looking at a cross of 5, 10, or 20 independently sorted genes? \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018 Mendelian Genetics 6. Why is it so expensive to produce a hybrid plant seed? 7. In certain bacteria, an oval shape (O) is dominant over round (o) and thick cell walls (T) are dominant over thin (t). Show a cross between a heterozygous oval, thick cell walled bacteria with a round, thin cell walled bacteria. What are the phenotypes of the F1 and F2 offspring? \u00a9 eScience Labs, 2018<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n| Excellent<\/strong><\/td>\n | Good<\/strong><\/td>\n | Fair<\/strong><\/td>\n | Poor<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n\n | Main Postinga<\/strong><\/td>\n | 45\u00a0(45%)\u00a0– 50\u00a0(50%)<\/p>\n | Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Supported by at least three current, credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n 40\u00a0(40%)\u00a0– 44\u00a0(44%)<\/p>\n | Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Supported by at least three credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n 35\u00a0(35%)\u00a0– 39\u00a0(39%)<\/p>\n | Responds to some of the discussion question(s).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Post is cited with two credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains some APA formatting errors.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 34\u00a0(34%)<\/p>\n | Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains only one or no credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Not written clearly or concisely.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Main Post: Timeliness<\/strong><\/td>\n | 10\u00a0(10%)\u00a0– 10\u00a0(10%)<\/p>\n | Posts main post by day 3.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/p>\n | Does not post by day 3.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n First Response<\/strong><\/td>\n | 17\u00a0(17%)\u00a0– 18\u00a0(18%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 15\u00a0(15%)\u00a0– 16\u00a0(16%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 13\u00a0(13%)\u00a0– 14\u00a0(14%)<\/p>\n | Response is on topic and may have some depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 12\u00a0(12%)<\/p>\n | Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are missing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n No credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Second Response<\/strong><\/td>\n | 16\u00a0(16%)\u00a0– 17\u00a0(17%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 14\u00a0(14%)\u00a0– 15\u00a0(15%)<\/p>\n | Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.<\/td>\n 12\u00a0(12%)\u00a0– 13\u00a0(13%)<\/p>\n | Response is on topic and may have some depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 11\u00a0(11%)<\/p>\n | Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Responses to faculty questions are missing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n No credible sources are cited.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Participation<\/strong><\/td>\n | 5\u00a0(5%)\u00a0– 5\u00a0(5%)<\/p>\n | Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.<\/td>\n 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/td>\n | 0\u00a0(0%)\u00a0– 0\u00a0(0%)<\/p>\n | Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Total Points: 100<\/td>\n | <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n | <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n | <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Mendelian Genetics PRE-LAB QUESTIONS 1. You are observing a species of mice in which brown fur color is dominant to white fur color. When a brown mouse is crossed with a white mouse, all of their offspring have brown fur. Why did none of the offspring have white fur? 2. Can a person\u2019s genotype be […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29844","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"blocksy_meta":{"styles_descriptor":{"styles":{"desktop":"","tablet":"","mobile":""},"google_fonts":[],"version":6}},"yoast_head":"\n |