I’ve already thought about this myself after I came across an interview were JK said the gene was dominant. From the evidence in the book I thought it would have to be recessive and also thought maybe it was to do with multiple genes. It’s fun to think about but I think JK said herself they’re not really scientifically thought out books. There are bond to be many contradictions to whatever conclusion you come to in this matter I think.

The wizard gene is dominant, however that does not stop it having mutated variants that are recessive and other mutated genes that block it. If a pureblood wizard and witch carry these mutant genes then they will have a squib. However generations later (maybe centuries) a muggle carrying a mutant recessive magic gene might with another muggle carrier of the mutant recessive gene and produce a muggleborn wizard or witch. In order of dominants: M= Magic dominant, m=muggle, mb=mutant gene blocks magic recessive, mr=magic recessive.

Likewise in the case of muggleborns with two recessive magic genes, their bodies when passing on their genes to their children can using “junk DNA” turn their recessive magic gene into a dominant gene, so all their children have magic ability.

Hahaha. “Research Finds Harry Potter Descended From Wizards.”

Oh god, then what have I been reading for 8 years?! Tanya Grotter and the Muggletastic Escapade?

aren’t there more inportant things in science to worry about than wizarding blood lines? this is stupid.

And there are still children dying of AIDS and cancer. Kudos to the geneticists who have squandered their education on fictional character.

Wow, it’s amazing how all of YOU are allowed to have as much fun with Potter as you want, but scientists have to be frickin’ robots. Lighten up, people. If you must worry about wasted time, then concentrate on your own contributions to this world of ours.

Stacie, I know this doesn’t seem like a proper use of time for researches from Oxford, but if you look at it in another way, it’s very helpful indeed, The objective of Oxford University is to educate people, and what better way to explain genetics to a broader audience, then to use something as popular as the “Harry Potter” universe? This way, those people (adults and children included) who enjoy the series, might acquire a firmer understanding of the way that genes and DNA work in the real world. A subject that might not have interested them at all, might just come alive for them in this way.

A waste of time and resources? Shouldn’t they be saving the world? Come on, these are doctorate level scientists; this information probably took them all of two hours of combined break time while sipping their coffee to figure out!

I completely agree with everything you said Bandersnatch- thank you for being logical. ;) This article was quite interesting! Thank you Leaky!

Bandersnatch, I completely agree.

So do I Amy :)

Now all I need to figure out is where I fit into one of these wizarding families…

They’d have to be recessive if muggleborns could become witches and wizards, because then they’d get “w” and not “W” because then that means that their parents would have to have a big W gene which would make them wizards…. So the gene has to be recessive “ww.” The parents genes would look like this “Mw” and “Mw” having M-muggle being the dominate gene. And then they’d end up each passing down the recessive “w” and TADA!! A muggle born. “ww.” That would only happen 1/4 of the time.

Wow… this is actually kinda stupid lol.

SWEET! I just finished the first semester of AP Bio today and this is awesome. It’s like epistasis, where one gene determines the phenotype (in this case, being a wizard) and another determines if that gene is expressed or not.

Like with mice, they have a gene that says if they have brown or black fur, and another that determines if the pigment is expressed, which is why some are white. Seems like the same thing is going on here, pretty cool!