Talk:Muller's morphs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why this isn't in mutation[edit]

I made this article (and redirected the morphs from mutation) so that a student of genetics can easily find a comparison of Muller's terms. It's important to keep them together with the genetic definitions (e.g. m/+ > m/m). Now it would be nice to have a simple real-life example for each morph. Dr d12 02:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please translate into english[edit]

Increasing wildtype gene function reduces the phenotypic severity of an antimorph, so the phenotype of an antimorph is worse when heterozygous than when in trans to a gene duplication.

Hey, can someone please tell me what it means to be "trans to a gene duplication"? I've heard of chemical cis and trans isomers but what does trans mean here? Does it mean that a hetro is worse than a homozygous normal condition? Isn't that a given considering that a homo would have only functioning alleles?Tourskin (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I agree that unfolding the jargon is important. Now that "Neomorph redirects here" etcetera (I got dropped here pursuing a link to "dominant negative") this article has wider exposure than just "so that a student of genetics can easily find a comparison of Muller's terms". I'm guessing that I might find that it's explaining "dominant negative" in functional terms relating to genetics experimentation using fruit-flies circa 1946, but it doesn't really help me towards the current contextual understanding of "dominant negative". I was researching "Myotonic Dystrophy" for family reasons. 173.206.238.50 (talk) 07:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Neomorphs[edit]

Have Neomorphs ever been observed in a lab?? It seems as though Muller made up this concept with zero evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.116.68.182 (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]