I had a homework question that I could not figure out.

It states:

A woman has cystic fibrosis in her family and did not want to have a child that suffered from the disease. She and her spouse went for genetic testing and counselling. She tested positive as a carrier and her spouse tested negative, and their first child was born with cystic fibrosis. Explain how this could happen.

This doesn't make sense because the punnet square would be:

$$ \begin{array}{c|c|c} & A & A \\ \hline A & AA & AA \\ \hline a & Aa & Aa \end{array} $$

This says there are no two recessive alleles which can cause cystic fibrosis.

  • $\begingroup$ Well, if the question is perfectly correct, than as per my opinion the only alternative left is MUTATION. $\endgroup$ – Shefali Jan 31 '14 at 2:17

If really cystic fibrose is expressed only in homozygotes, then here are some possible explanations:

  • Mutation
    • very improbable
  • Autofecundation
    • very improbable
  • False Negative when testing the father
    • Because of the test False Negative Rate. @kmm made a very interesting comment below. He said that according to this article 75% of the mutations coding for disease correspond to one pattern (3 base pair deletion). The other 25% of the mutations coding for disease might not be detected in the standard test. If so, it is very likely that a the test conducting on the father was a false negative. It would be worth further investigate the test that are usually performed to confirm this.
    • Because of human error. The laboratory operator might accidentally switch two samples or accidentally introduce stranger DNA before PCR (assuming the test is performed through sequencing)
    • I have no idea concerning the probability for such thing to occur!
  • trisomy
    • The assumes that a trisomic that have two recessive allele coding for disease and on dominant allele coding for health yield to a individual expressing the disease!
    • The gene for cystic fibrose is on chromosom 7. Trisomy 7 is extremely rare if I'm not mistaken.
  • The father is not the father!
    • According to different studies between 5% and 20% of the people are not fathered by the man they think is their dad.
    • According to this source the frequency of the disease is 1/2500 in UK. Assuming Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium the frequency of the allele coding for disease should be $p=0.02$.
    • The probability that the baby comes from another man and that the baby express the disease is $$a \cdot \left(\frac{2\cdot p\cdot (1-p)}{4} + \frac{p^2}{2}\right)$$, where $a$ is the probability that the baby was fathered by another man (let's say 10%) and $p$ is the frequency of the allele coding for the disease (0.02). The division by 2 and 4 are due to the probability that the (real) father and the mother transmit both the alleles coding for the disease. This probability equals $$0.1 \cdot \left(\frac{2\cdot 0.2\cdot (1-0.2)}{4} + \frac{0.2^2}{2}\right) = 0.01$$ This seems to be from far the most likely explanation! Note: this assumes that the mother is heterozygote (does not express the disease) otherwise, the probability would be 0.02.
  • $\begingroup$ I would also add "human error" to the list, a person changing the outcome, e.g. by contaminating the sample or a spelling error while transcribing the result. This might be surprisingly likely - somebody overly tired, or having a bad day. $\endgroup$ – jkadlubowska Jan 31 '14 at 17:48
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I kinda incorporated "human error" within the False Negative point. I'll make it more clear $\endgroup$ – Remi.b Jan 31 '14 at 23:18
  • $\begingroup$ It's probably the false negatives. According to ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2014829, 75% of carriers have the standard pattern. They are probably not routinely testing the other 25% (which might constitute lots of different patterns). $\endgroup$ – kmm Feb 1 '14 at 15:41

I asked my Biology teacher and she said that the if the father is not a carrier, he must have the disease. So the father is aa.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You should tell your teacher that's a terribly worded question then - "negative" definitely doesn't mean they have the disease! Not your error at all. $\endgroup$ – Rory M Feb 2 '14 at 22:10
  • $\begingroup$ The question came from the book we use, and she also said it was a bad question. $\endgroup$ – user3175999 Feb 2 '14 at 22:11
  • $\begingroup$ Well, this answer does not answer your question! It answers it assuming that the real meaning of the question was different than what was actually written! So, I am not quite sure this should be accepted as an answer and not flagged, although I agree that most likely your textbook did not expect you to perform probabilistic calculations and it actually was a very simple terribly poorly written question. $\endgroup$ – Remi.b Feb 4 '14 at 16:33
  • $\begingroup$ I copied the question right out of the book, and its only Grade 11 Biology. We didn't learn any calculations. $\endgroup$ – user3175999 Feb 11 '14 at 23:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.