hismastersvoice wrote...
Of course not. They do however provide the rearrangement pattern for the mother's genes, as stated in a codex quote in this thread, and rearranging genes is, like, 95% of the reason for mating. And if the child's genes are rearranged in accordance with the pattern based on the "father's" imput then it's perfectly feasible for it to have it's "father's" character or minor morphological traits.
Not really: genes are highly context-dependent for their "meaning". A gene isn't an eye-color gene because that specific sequence is just the instantiation of some eternal "eye-color gene" form. Even for a coding gene, much of the actual protein produced may not be necessary for the function it performs. I.e., there's a lot of arbitrary, "just 'cause" stuff going on that's just the result of historical contingencies.
There's really no good reason to think just sticking any non-asari (or more accurately, non-
Thessian) genetic sequence (whatever method you use to do that, be it by "melding randomization" or with lab gear) into an asari genome would even work at all, much less be expressed in just such a way as to have the same phenotypic result as it would in krogan or a human or whatever. That's not even guaranteed here on
this planet, where everything really is genetically related. Yeah, it works far more often than not, but that's only because we share nearly identical genetic "contexts" with most species.
And given that convergently evolved features tend to involve completely different, non-homologous genes (if they didn't, then they wouldn't be convergent. Not all of them of course. A lot of the basic genetic machinery gets re-used constantly), the fact that so many species are bipedal and humanoid doesn't make the odds of it working at all better. The turians and quarians outright kill that idea dead, what with them being in the chiral minority but looking far more similar to humans than the hanar, which are on the same chiral "team".
Modifié par didymos1120, 12 septembre 2010 - 12:06 .