BRS error?

Discussion in 'Step I' started by Erek94, 05.19.14.

  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:
    03.15.10
    Messages:
    93
    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:
    03.13.12
    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:
    03.06.14
    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: 05.19.14
  5. Erek94

    Erek94 5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    03.15.10
    Messages:
    93
    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:
    03.06.14
    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:
    12.05.12
    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:
    03.06.14
    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: 05.19.14
  9. Erek94

    Erek94 5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    03.15.10
    Messages:
    93
    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

Similar Threads
  1. nuclearrabbit77
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,173
  2. rxfudd
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    898
  3. Thaitanium
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    679
  4. 318038
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    948
  5. Concubine
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    748
Loading...

Share This Page