Assuming there are at least 3 alleles of the gene $G$ in total - $G_R$, $G_S$ and $G_P$ - is there any gene for which the following is true?

  • $G_R$ is more dominant than $G_S$.

  • $G_S$ is more dominant than $G_P$.

  • $G_P$ is more dominant than $G_R$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Note that the "rock-paper-scissors pattern" is more formally known as a "non-transitive relation". You may be familiar with a transitive relation, where if A>B and B>C, then A>C. If instead A>B and B>C, but A<C (C>A), then it's known as a non-transitive relation, like the one you describe here. $\endgroup$ – electronpusher Nov 4 '19 at 9:48

A quick search gives this same question in this Reddit post.

Apparently, there is not yet an existing example of such dominance of three alleles on one another.

That said, if you're interested in rock-paper-scissor patterns in nature, then you will be interested in the side-blotched lizard. It has three genetically encoded male "sexes", that also determines their behaviour. At a population level, the three sexes follow a rock-paper-scissor pattern of successful sexual competition, in that orange-throated individuals can outcompete yellow-throated ones, which can outcompete blue-throated ones, which can outcome orange-throated ones. A simulation has been carried out to model the underlying genetics, but that model doesn't involve a rock-paper-scissors pattern of genetic dominance.

| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ @ruakh You mean "outcompete", not "outcome". $\endgroup$ – CJ Dennis Nov 3 '19 at 3:12
  • $\begingroup$ @CJDennis: Yeah, I noticed that typo a few days after proposing the edit. (I also should have written something like "[...] but to be clear, that model [...]" instead of just "but that model".) But given that the edit took almost two weeks to get approved, it doesn't seem worth proposing a new edit just to fix such minor issues. :-/ $\endgroup$ – ruakh Nov 3 '19 at 3:58
  • $\begingroup$ @ruakh Too late now, but you can edit your edit before its approved. $\endgroup$ – CJ Dennis Nov 3 '19 at 4:15
  • $\begingroup$ @CJDennis: Oh! Oops. Good to know. :-P $\endgroup$ – ruakh Nov 3 '19 at 4:24

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.