BRS error?

Discussion in 'Step I' started by Erek94, May 19, 2014.

  1. SDN is made possible through member donations, sponsorships, and our volunteers. Learn about SDN's nonprofit mission.
  1. Erek94

    Erek94 5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    Messages:
    94
    Status:
    Medical Student
    Is there an error in the BRS explaination or am I just missing the concept here. They say the answer is 1/64 but I got 1/16 .
     

    Attached Files:

  2. SDN Members don't see this ad. About the ads.
  3. Enzymes

    Enzymes 2+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    155
    Status:
    Medical Student
    I got 1/16 too. Stage IV has a 50% chance of being a carrier. And the only way to get disease expression is two carriers having a baby (1/4 chance). So I got 1/4 * 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/ 16.
     
  4. dyspareunia

    dyspareunia

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,019
    Status:
    Medical Student
    It's 1/64.

    It's (1/2)*(1/2)*(1/2)*(1/2)*(1/4)

    Gen II for patient's mom = 1/2
    Gen III for patient's mom = 1/2


    Gen II for patient's dad = 1/2
    Gen III for patient's dad = 1/2

    Then a child has a 1/4 chance of being homo-recessive from two hetero parents.

    Both generation II and generation III are 1/2 because the people are already born and must be heterozygous or there is no chance the unborn child will be affected. In a heterozygous cross you have 1 AA, 2 Aa, 1 aa. So 2/4 are heterozygous. Since the parents are both heterozygous, their child has a 1/4 chance of being homorecessive.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2014
  5. Erek94

    Erek94 5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    Messages:
    94
    Status:
    Medical Student
    I guess my confusion is trying to wrap my head around how gen II to III is 1/2? I woudl think its 100% because one of the parents has the disease.
     
  6. dyspareunia

    dyspareunia

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,019
    Status:
    Medical Student
    And the other parent is heterozygous. The only 100% chance is if both parents are homozygous recessive.
     
  7. DrEnderW

    DrEnderW 2+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,601
    Location:
    Rishi Maze
    Status:
    Medical Student
    If II-2 is affected (aa) and has a child with a homozygous WT (AA) that would be:

    AA x aa = 100% chance offspring is a carrier

    Why is that not the case?
     
  8. dyspareunia

    dyspareunia

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,019
    Status:
    Medical Student
    Oh I see what you're all saying now. I agree, 1/16 looks right.

    Edit: Nope, nevermind.. back to 1/64, here's why.

    Generation III is 100% carrier (both maternal and paternal sides).

    For some reason the tendency to assume heterozygosity resonates with me. I remember my genetics teacher explained this, but I don't remember why or how.

    So, assuming all 4 maternal grandparents are heterozygotes, you now have (1/2)*(1/2) for BOTH maternal and paternal odds and another (1/2)*(1/2) for baby

    Thus, (1/2)^6.

    You get (1/2)^4 if you assume that 2 grandparents are homozygous dominant and the other 2 are heterozygotes though.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2014
  9. Erek94

    Erek94 5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    Messages:
    94
    Status:
    Medical Student
    I appreciate your time and effort.
    Here is the explaination the book gives. I just dont understand how there is a 1/2 chance from II-2 to III-1. Your logic obviously got the question correct for you and I cant argue that. I would just continue to get this type of problem wrong over and over again if presented like this.
     

    Attached Files:


About the ads

Share This Page