Then all the others would be wild mixed with a dominate trait of white eyes, yellow bodies. However, some are completely wild. These had no representation in the Punnet square. .
Our assumptions of phenotypes and genotypes are unique, and possibly incorrect. We assumed all of our flies would at least have one of the observed traits, whether it was dominant or recessive, we did not know. Most of our flies were tan/yellow/brown bodied, with yellow eyes. That was an important factor in the phenotype analysis. However, that did not mean they don't have white/red as a recessive trait, and the same for the other flies. A fine observation may be that the flies have any gene possible, depending on the mate and dominant genes. The traits are based on the genes of each fly involved in the mating process. This may explain many unanswered observations. Over 75% of the flies were "Large Y" and "Large W" dominant. Depending on the mate, the traits will be YW. However, if mated with a wild fly, the traits could vary increasingly. .
The reasoning behind these assumptions is based on our and other's observations. This may be true because our data shows the facts. I am hesitant to apply this because of our chance for error. It is because we did not count every single fly, and we had potential of misreading an observation. This may cause our observations to be thrown off track. .
My new hypothesis is that there may have been some fly's left over from a previous generation that had not been counted then. This would have drastically thrown off our readings. If an error was made in counting, it would have the same effect. This experiment allows for errors.
Our number of cross over is 87. The total number is the population is 178. .
87/178 = .4887640449*100= 48.8/2 = 24.43820225 = 24.44.
The dominate body color trait is definitely yellowish brown/tan. There is no question about this assumption. The dominant trair for eye color is red.
