Genetics

He is currently hopping around the house like a mad rabbit saying, "Don't bounce in the house!"  If only he'd take his own advice.  *sigh*  The poor downstairs neighbours!

I'm tellin' ya, I think these two already know each other.  Aillidh is, at last check, jumping from one end of hte living room to the other repeating, 'I'm jumpin', jumpin', jumpin'!'

OK, this is sort of weird to bring up... Maybe it's the full moon, Pebbles ??
So it got me thinking, since we're from wayyyy different gene pools, I'm wondering if that will affect how our children look, etc.  Like I know many people who are more than one race, and they always have the most beautiful complextions!  My niece who is half Japanese for example...  

I think that's attributable more to the difference in ethnicity rather than difference in locale of each separate parent.     

I'm just thinking this also because I know that dogs, for example, tend to be healthier when they are mutts.

True. Due to inbreeding, which limits a gene pool and ups the chances of a recessive disorder appearing, certain breeds of dogs are rather prone to genetic abnormalities.  The same is true for humans, although most people aren't selectively bred by another power for hair colour and temprament   Oh, except for the royal family, that is . . . and you see where it got them!

I think most Americans by now are at least 3rd or 4th generation and I'm just wondering what you all think of us Americans giving some "fresh" genes to the pool?  Do you think there's anything to it?  

Certainly moving from one continent to another is bound to open up new gene combinations, but the US is so huge and the population so mobile that it's fairly rare to find small gene pools with the attendant homozygous recessive disorders (except in the Deep South . . . KIDDING!! ).

Oh boy (or girl)!!!!  I'm on the pill... and now I am very afraid    Did you miss often (I'm really bad at taking it) or were you the 0.01% chance?  Maybe I should get myself on a better schedule....   

I am another one of those women who never missed a pill and became pregnant...with twins!

I think most Americans by now are at least 3rd or 4th generation and I'm just wondering what you all think of us Americans giving some "fresh" genes to the pool?  Do you think there's anything to it?  

Depends where you live in America. A very large number of the people in the area of New York where I lived were immigrants or children of immigrants. I'm 2nd generation myself.

The ONLY thing you can definitely know for sure even before birth is that if you have blue eyes and blonde hair and your SO has blue eyes and blonde hair, you are going to be giving birth to a child that will have blue eyes and blonde hair.

My parents were from relatively the same gene pool, my mother the daughter of immigrant Swedes to the U.S. (neither of whom were blonde by the way) and my father was Norwegian-English.  She had extremely dark brown, nearly black hair and brown eyes.  He had light brown hair (what was left of it) and hazel eyes.  They had five children.  I have/had rich auburn hair, brown eyes, very pale skin.  Next kid, boy, was blonde, blue eyes, bad complexion (and got my father's baldness as well eventually), middle sister had medium brown hair, hazel eyes, sallow complexion, next brother has nearly black hair, brown eyes, tans copper, youngest sister, golden blonde, dark brown eyes, great skin.

Courtney was a BC baby as well.
Genetic wise,she has A LOT of brown hair (she has more hair on her head then my hubby!) and she has hazel eyes just like me and him. She did inherit his big feet though, judging by the size of her feet,it looks also that she might inherit his height (he's 6'2 and I'm 5'4)

The ONLY thing you can definitely know for sure even before birth is that if you have blue eyes and blonde hair and your SO has blue eyes and blonde hair, you are going to be giving birth to a child that will have blue eyes and blonde hair.

This isn't strictly correct.  Although it seems to fly in the face of conventional genetics it is actually possible for two blue-eyed parents to conceive offspring with green or even brown eyes.

My little brother is ginger. My mother and her husband have brown hair and everyone on both sides of the family have brown hair as well............. I thinks my mother slept with the milkman

I believe, however, that the combination of two blue-eyed blondes will produce another blue-eyed blonde.  This is, of course, provided both blondes are telling the truth about being blonde.

My little brother is ginger. My mother and her husband have brown hair and everyone on both sides of the family have brown hair as well............. I thinks my mother slept with the milkman

Brown hair is a dominant trait so there is nothing strange about brown-haired parents having blond or ginger-haired offspring. And this also explains why there are more brown-haired people in our family than ginger-haired ones.

I believe, however, that the combination of two blue-eyed blondes will produce another blue-eyed blonde.  This is, of course, provided both blondes are telling the truth about being blonde.

This is true in simple Mendelian genetics where a single trait has only two alleles: dominant (B) and recessive (b). But, as has been proven, the human genome is comprised of many more subtleties than peas.  Modifier genes  can make a startling difference in an individual's phenotype. Even with a genotype of bb (coding for blue eyes) the phenotype of the individual can be green or, in some cases, brown. This is because modifier genes can affect the amount of pigment that gets distributed through the iris, thus affecting phenotype.  As well, modifier genes can completely mask the  dominant allele of a heterozygous for brown eyes (Bb) individual so that their phenotype is also blue or green.

edited to add: The above individual would then have one dominant (B) and one recessive (b) gene to contribute to  an offspring. In this way two people with blue eyes could, indeed, have a brown-eyed child.

Certainly moving from one continent to another is bound to open up new gene combinations, but the US is so huge and the population so mobile that it's fairly rare to find small gene pools with the attendant homozygous recessive disorders (except in the Deep South . . . KIDDING!! ).

Actually I was refering to the UK gene pool being more homogenous than the US.  Of course the US has probably the most mixed up genes of any nation.  I was just thinking that the children might turn out better looking if Americans mated with British, and if the British mate with British just because of the extreme mixture of genes. 

My DF is from North Yorkshire and he was telling me about towns where it's all cousins and it has been for hundreds of years.  Whole towns have only like 2/3 last names for a majority of the people.  Of course I know there are places like that in the US as well, espcially in the south, but it hasn't gone on for as long.

Just made me think is all   Who knows..  

Although it seems to fly in the face of conventional genetics it is actually possible for two blue-eyed parents to conceive offspring with green or even brown eyes.

I've seen a lot of this.  My FIL, for example, is a green-eyed person born to two parents with ice blue eyes. He also has brown hair, yet both his parents were blondes.

I have very dark brown eyes - but I know my paternal grandfather's eyes were grey and have two first cousins with green eyes (yet both their parents had brown ones).  I'm married to a blue-eyed man.  Aillidh's eyes at 2.5 years of age are true green.

A geneticist friend tells me traits like hair, skin and eye colour are governed by several alleles, and modifiers affect phenotype as well.

Keith and I are both blonde, he has blue eyes, I have brown.  DD is blonde with blue eyes, DS is a redhead with blue eyes and I can solemnly swear that the milkman had nothing to do with it!

Actually I was refering to the UK gene pool being more homogenous than the US.  Of course the US has probably the most mixed up genes of any nation.  I was just thinking that the children might turn out better looking if Americans mated with British, and if the British mate with British just because of the extreme mixture of genes. 

Attractiveness is such a subjective trait, though, isn't it? Except for very specific traits which signal better mating partners than others, the idea of "pretty" and "cute" is completely cultural. So more or less homogenous gene pools would really mean very little.

My DF is from North Yorkshire and he was telling me about towns where it's all cousins and it has been for hundreds of years.  Whole towns have only like 2/3 last names for a majority of the people.  Of course I know there are places like that in the US as well, espcially in the south, but it hasn't gone on for as long.

Just made me think is all   Who knows..  

And since they all seem to be doing all right in the breeding department, someone is finding someone attractive!