Karloff Wrote:In other words, breeding a recessive hidden with a recessive shown causes that recessive to become an effectivly dominant trait, in that it will show up significantly more frequently than the normally dominant trait?
I hope I'm understanding you correctly and that my remarks are relevant to what you need. I think your statement is on the right track but not precise.
The dominant trait will show 100% of the time - not just "significantly more frequently". 100%. The less dominant doesn't get a small percentage to "pop out". It Never Pops unless there is another More Recessive hidden trait that "lets" it pop out. Dominance of course is a relative term, which is why we all consult Saga's dominance documents so obsessively. I think of it as a kind of game of rock, paper, scissors, where rock always beats scissors but paper covers rock. You have to choose your mates so that a more recessive trait will "let" the trait you want out. [The problem with my rock, paper, scissors analogy is that that game is circular, and KittyCats charts/traits aren't, but I still find the analogy helpful in some ways to talk about how a trait beats another trait.]
OR, and this is what we mainly end up doing, you mate two offspring that both have the desired hidden trait, and hope that they both end up tossing it, in which case it will show. Statistically, two cats should both toss their hiddens 25% of the time, but as with all runs of coin tosses, there's a deviation from the statistical average in any given sample.
So yes, given a run of offspring, over time, the hidden will "pop out" more often if you've buried a more-hidden trait in the parents. Conversely, if you haven't, the hidden trait will Never pop out, unless there happens to be a recessive hidden present that you didn't know about.
I'm sure I've said that in a too-condensed way, but I hope it helps.
