Genus vs. Specie

[GrifTheGreat]

They may also be called samurais or mutants........

The Samurais aren't Orwells. They are Cranwellies. If they were Ornate Hybrids they would have features of Ornates like the false eye spots. Orwells are also not mutants otherwise Fantacy Frogs would also be known as mutants which they are not. They are just a Hybrid produced by mixed breeding of C. Cranwelli and C. Cornuta.

[cali]

As for the "false eye"-
Who says that an offspring would carry that trait? It would have just as much chance NOT to carry the trait (since one of it parents had it, one didn't)

Genetics is a funny thing- in theory, the way that a genetic strand splits when creating an egg or sperm, 2 children from the same parents could have 0.00% of the same genetic makeup. Literally, 2 brothers could be absolutely, completely, 100% not related to eachother (genetically speaking). Of course the odds of this happening is beyond ludicrous, just from the shear amount of data involved in a DNA sequence. It would be like 2 people constantly flipping coins for a million years, and everytime they came up opposite. That's not gonna happen- but it's possible.

And if we go back to skeletalfrog's paper, it's quite clear that we know less about our beloved pacmans then we think. It states multiple times that there are 2n specimens of ornates as well as 8n's. Therefore, a 2n ornate would be able to breed with a 2n cranwell, but a 2n ornate would not be able to breed with an 8n ornate.

The term "ornate" may be simple symantics.

[cali]

My points are this-

Just because we call it an "Ornate", doesn't mean that it's genetically the same as my neighbors "Ornate"- even if they APPEAR identical.

In crossing of an "Ornate" and a "Cranwell"- there could be 2 offspring, from the same clutch, same parents, wich share zero DNA. Thus- The term "Orwell" would become moot, since it could be used to describe 2 specimens that have 100% different DNA.

Now of course these last 2 posts of mine are simplified, but 100% accurate and true.

[GrifTheGreat]

As for the "false eye"-
Who says that an offspring would carry that trait? It would have just as much chance NOT to carry the trait (since one of it parents had it, one didn't)

Genetics is a funny thing- in theory, the way that a genetic strand splits when creating an egg or sperm, 2 children from the same parents could have 0.00% of the same genetic makeup. Literally, 2 brothers could be absolutely, completely, 100% not related to eachother (genetically speaking). Of course the odds of this happening is beyond ludicrous, just from the shear amount of data involved in a DNA sequence. It would be like 2 people constantly flipping coins for a million years, and everytime they came up opposite. That's not gonna happen- but it's possible.

And if we go back to skeletalfrog's paper, it's quite clear that we know less about our beloved pacmans then we think. It states multiple times that there are 2n specimens of ornates as well as 8n's. Therefore, a 2n ornate would be able to breed with a 2n cranwell, but a 2n ornate would not be able to breed with an 8n ornate.

The term "ornate" may be simple symantics.

If that were the case then why do all Fantacy frogs have traits from both parents. They do not look like one or the other alone, but like both. While Samurai Pacman frogs look only like Cranwellies. There would still be a sign from both parents somewhere in their appearence which there is not. It would be impossible to mix breed so many and never have atleast a few Samurais that looked. Like an Ornate or that took on traits from both parents. Its not possible to have that many sucessful breedings that only turned up with only Cranwelli appearance alone. Its highly unlikely.

I believe more fresh research needs to be done.

[cali]

Simple-

You have 2 people trapped inside of you (one set from mom, one set from dad)
Both of your parents had 2 people trapped inside of each of them (one from each of their parents)
Etc etc etc....

That means there was 4 possible traits for everything that makes you when your parents reproduced, but only 2 made it into your DNA- wich means that 2 have nothing to do with your genetic makeup and where lost (when it comes to your DNA structure). Just because one of your parents had a trait doesn't mean that you have it anywhere.

google eye color passive/recessive for a good example.


Selective breeding.
Passive and Recessive genes.

Prime example-
ALL dog breeds that we keep as pets are descended from wolves.
However, If I breed 2 rottweilers, the pups will be rottweilers, not poodles- even though both breeds ultimately came from the same ancestors- wich looked like neither 10,000 years ago.

And yes it is completely possible to ditch a trait from a parent.

[GrifTheGreat]

Simple-

You have 2 people trapped inside of you (one set from mom, one set from dad)
Both of your parents had 2 people trapped inside of each of them (one from each of their parents)
Etc etc etc....

That means there was 4 possible traits for everything that makes you when your parents reproduced, but only 2 made it into your DNA- wich means that 2 have nothing to do with your genetic makeup and where lost (when it comes to your DNA structure). Just because one of your parents had a trait doesn't mean that you have it anywhere.

google eye color passive/recessive for a good example.


Selective breeding.
Passive and Recessive genes.

Prime example-
ALL dog breeds that we keep as pets are descended from wolves.
However, If I breed 2 rottweilers, the pups will be rottweilers, not poodles- even though both breeds ultimately came from the same ancestors- wich looked like neither 10,000 years ago.

And yes it is completely possible to ditch a trait from a parent.

What about the people heterochromatia. Where one eye is blue and the other brown? Also the traits in the DNA would not be lost they would still be there otherwise grandchildren would not take on the appearance of the grandparents or relatives further back. Eventually both sides would appear and even those thaught lost would eventually show back up. DNA just doesn't disappear through breeding. Plus I don't think Samurai Japan has been doing it long enough for those traits to be gone since it would literally take several hundred years to become so recessive tthat it doesn't show through.