Actually, what you describe is changing the allele frequencies, not the dominant/recessive nature of the alleles. For example, Blue eye color in humans is a recessive trait and brown eye color the dominant trait. But brown eyes are not prevalent in all populations. In populations where blue eyes is more prevalent, the brown allele is still dominant, but is present in very low frequency whereas the blue allele is present at a much higher frequency.
Eye color is actually a polygenic trait, so brown vs. blue is really a vast oversimplification. Plus, as you mention,color is affected by light scattering, etc.. The point I was making, though, is that the dominant/recessive nature of a trait does not determine it’s prevalence in a population – allele frequency does.
alviebird almost 8 years ago
That’s where those nine lives come in handy.
SusanSunshine Premium Member almost 8 years ago
For the selection process to favor non-curious cats, there would have to be some non-curious cats to breed.
banjinshiju almost 8 years ago
Cats make up for a high mortality rate by having a high birth rate.
John M almost 8 years ago
curiosity may have killed the cat, but I suspect it made the species more likely to survive
drmickeyg almost 8 years ago
Actually, what you describe is changing the allele frequencies, not the dominant/recessive nature of the alleles. For example, Blue eye color in humans is a recessive trait and brown eye color the dominant trait. But brown eyes are not prevalent in all populations. In populations where blue eyes is more prevalent, the brown allele is still dominant, but is present in very low frequency whereas the blue allele is present at a much higher frequency.
drmickeyg almost 8 years ago
Eye color is actually a polygenic trait, so brown vs. blue is really a vast oversimplification. Plus, as you mention,color is affected by light scattering, etc.. The point I was making, though, is that the dominant/recessive nature of a trait does not determine it’s prevalence in a population – allele frequency does.