![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackX-Men
In the X-men films Wolverine said the x-gene is passed on by men. I assumed this was just him yanking the parents' chain: after all, he's a memory-loss ex-cage-fighter posing as an art teacher, he might not know himself.
The films didn't have enough breeding to make it clear how it is inherited, but we infer (a) x-children are born to normal parents and (b) children of one or two "mutants" are more likely or certain to be so themselves (c) male and female "mutants" are equally likely.
Would the male thing be possible? Forgetting genetics, is it logically possible?
1. There can be male-line-only genes. Eg. genes that cause women to be infertile. However, it seems these would have a tendency to disappear, as your son's sons will have a 1/4 chance of inheriting their mother's and grandmother's genes at that point on the chromosome.
2. That *could* be the mechanism. Suppose a large number of such genes, and the absence of any causing "mutants". However, you'd expect an explosion in their population once they start to appear.
3. You might contrive a method whereby "being the father of mutants" was inherited in a normal through-both-lines way, say when you get two of a recessive gene, and only when you have that quality, and only through the sperm, can some actual mutant genetics be passed on. But I don't know how you'd arrange that biologically.
4. Or there might be a male only gene, a number of male lines of potential mutants, which is only expressed when some environmental factor is met. But that doesn't feel like it was inherited directly from the father, that the chance of the extra factor was more involved.
Did the comic books specify anything differently and more precisely than the films?
Can anyone improve on my genetic ramblings...?
Heroes
I was going to comment that it seems like children are special if and only if both parent are. And that's most likely explained by a recessive gene for specialness[1], and the chance that all the examples we've seen have been from both parents being special, rather than carriers.
But wondered if there's anything that can only be inherited from both parents. It seems awkward -- how the hell would it get started?
But I've run out of space and time[2].
[1] And a parcel of other genes that determine the kind of specialness, if that specialness is unlocked.
[2] As it were.
In the X-men films Wolverine said the x-gene is passed on by men. I assumed this was just him yanking the parents' chain: after all, he's a memory-loss ex-cage-fighter posing as an art teacher, he might not know himself.
The films didn't have enough breeding to make it clear how it is inherited, but we infer (a) x-children are born to normal parents and (b) children of one or two "mutants" are more likely or certain to be so themselves (c) male and female "mutants" are equally likely.
Would the male thing be possible? Forgetting genetics, is it logically possible?
1. There can be male-line-only genes. Eg. genes that cause women to be infertile. However, it seems these would have a tendency to disappear, as your son's sons will have a 1/4 chance of inheriting their mother's and grandmother's genes at that point on the chromosome.
2. That *could* be the mechanism. Suppose a large number of such genes, and the absence of any causing "mutants". However, you'd expect an explosion in their population once they start to appear.
3. You might contrive a method whereby "being the father of mutants" was inherited in a normal through-both-lines way, say when you get two of a recessive gene, and only when you have that quality, and only through the sperm, can some actual mutant genetics be passed on. But I don't know how you'd arrange that biologically.
4. Or there might be a male only gene, a number of male lines of potential mutants, which is only expressed when some environmental factor is met. But that doesn't feel like it was inherited directly from the father, that the chance of the extra factor was more involved.
Did the comic books specify anything differently and more precisely than the films?
Can anyone improve on my genetic ramblings...?
Heroes
I was going to comment that it seems like children are special if and only if both parent are. And that's most likely explained by a recessive gene for specialness[1], and the chance that all the examples we've seen have been from both parents being special, rather than carriers.
But wondered if there's anything that can only be inherited from both parents. It seems awkward -- how the hell would it get started?
But I've run out of space and time[2].
[1] And a parcel of other genes that determine the kind of specialness, if that specialness is unlocked.
[2] As it were.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-07 02:40 pm (UTC)Ah, that's an interesting thought. There's a whole bunch of ways inheritance can happen other than just dominant/recessive as taught in school biology, I didn't try to get into having no idea how it might apply. That one's interesting.
However I thing all of these traits are far too complex to be controlled by a single gene, and there ought to be a lot more "almost superheroes" that are tottally messed up.
LOL. Well, yes.
But then, that's the premise of the series, if you required that to be accurate, you just wouldn't have a series at all :) So I'm determined, in face of the evidence, that the mutations either make you so unworkable you're never born, or give you something somewhat controllable.
To be fair to heroes, it faces this a little bit. The powers aren't anywhere near as random as chance would dictate (most of them are defined by the boundaries of bodies or objects!) but there is a sense of being dealt a power and it might not be tidy or good for you.