Type | Left splint | Right splint | Mutagen | Products | Info | Effect? |
flax | Nile Green | Nile Green | mott retic slimy | Amtep#2 | 2/0/2/1 | GYO -> GRO |
Amtep#3 | ? (0 seeds, lost) | possibly GRO -> GYO (RO is the seed gene) | ||||
flax | Nile Green | Nile Green | mott retic slimy | Amtep#4 | 2/0/2/1 | identical to Amtep#2 |
Amtep#5 | ? (0 seeds, lost) | must have lost R-O | ||||
vine | Royal Tower | Royal Tower | mott retic slimy | Amtep#6 | alco ?, sugar 1, sour 1 | KYOROYK -> KYOOOYK |
Amtep#7 | alco ?, sugar 1 | KYOROYK -> KYORRYK | ||||
flax | Amtep#2 | Amtep#2 | mott retic slimy | Amtep#8 | 2/0/2/1 | |
Amtep#9 | 2/0/2/1 |
G-R-G-Y-G (4x) (fits at base 3) Y-Y-R-G-R (2x) (new!) G-Y-G-Y-G (fits at base 5) G-Y-G-R-G (fits at base 9) R-G-R-G-Y (fits at base 2) Y-G-R-G-R (new!) R-G-R-O-Y (new!) R-O-Y-Y-O (2x) (fits at base 21) O-Y-Y-O-R (2x) (fits at base 22) Y-Y-O-R-R (fits at base 23) R-O-R-Y-Y (new!) Y-G-Y (4x) (fits at bases 6, 8, 17) Y-Y-O (2x) (fits at base 23) Y-Y-R (2x) (new, fits in Y-Y-R-G-R) G-R-G (7x) (fits at bases 3, 11) R-G-R (5x) (fits at base 2) K-O-R (4x) (fits at start) R-O-R (new, fits in R-O-R-Y-Y) R-G-Y (3x) (fits at bases 4, 12) G-R-O (6x) (fits at base 20) Y-R-G (2x) (new, fits in Y-Y-R-G-R) O-R-G (2x) (fits at base 1) R-Y-Y (new, fits in R-O-R-Y-Y) O-Y-Y (fits at base 22) Y-O-R (fits at base 24) O-R-R (fits at base 25) R-R-K (fits at base 26) O-R-Y (fits at base 15)
Original Nile Green:
K-O-R-G-R-G-Y-G-Y-G-Y-G-R-G-Y-O-R-Y-Y-R-G-R-O-Y-Y-O-R-R-K
Possible chaining, using Nile Green as guide:
K-O-R O-R-G R-G-R-G-Y G-R-G-Y-G G-Y-G-Y-G G-Y-G-Y-G G-Y-G-R-G Y-G-R-G-R* (new, divergence) G-R-O R-O-R-Y-Y Y-Y-R-G-R R-G-R-O-Y R-O-Y-Y-O O-Y-Y-O-R Y-Y-O-R-R R-R-K
K-O-R-G-R-G-Y-G-Y-G-Y-G-R-G-R-O-R-Y-Y-R-G-R-O-Y-Y-O-R-R-K
If this is the new sequence, then it should have the following flax properties:
2 seeds (R-O) 3 weed/water reductions (O-R), same as Nile Green 2 flax (G-Y-G-Y) 0 rotten flax (R-R-G-Y) dead zone resistance #1 (G-R-O) dead zone resistance #2 (R-O-Y)
As far as it's been tested, this matches how Amtep#2 actually grows.
O-R-Y-Y-R R-G-R-O-Y R-O-Y-Y-O Y-G-Y-G-R Y-R-G-R-O G-R-O-R G-Y-G-Y O-R-G-R O-R-R-K (2x) R-Y-Y-R G-R-G G-R-O G-Y-G O-R-G O-R-R O-R-Y R-G-R R-G-Y R-O-R R-O-Y (2x) R-R-K R-Y-Y Y-G-R Y-G-Y (2x) Y-Y-O Y-Y-R
Possible gene strand:
O-R-G-R G-R-G R-G-Y G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-Y Y-G-Y-G-R G-R-O-R O-R-Y-Y-R Y-R-G-R-O R-G-R-O-Y R-O-Y-Y-O O-R-R-K
K-O-R-G-R-G-Y-G-Y-G-Y-G-R-G-R-O-R-Y-Y-R-G-R-O-Y-Y-O-R-R-K (identical to Amtep#2)
If the mutagen is consistent in its effects, then Amtep#4 should be identical to Amtep#2. The evidence we have is consistent with that, but there's not yet enough for it to be conclusive.
G-R-O-R-Y (3x) G-R-O-Y-Y G-Y-G-R-G (2x) G-Y-G-Y-G (3x) O-Y-Y-O-R R-G-R-G-Y (3x) R-G-R-O-R R-G-R-O-Y R-G-Y-G-Y (2x) R-O-R-Y-Y R-Y-Y-R-G K-O-R-G-R Y-G-Y-G-Y Y-R-G-R-O Y-Y-O-R-R G-R-G (6x) G-R-O (3x) G-Y-G (5x) K-O-R (2x) O-R-G O-R-Y R-G-R (2x) R-G-Y R-O-R (3x) R-O-Y Y-G-Y (4x) Y-O-R (2x) Y-Y-O (4x) Y-Y-R (2x)
Chaining:
K-O-R-G-R R-G-R-G-Y R-G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-Y-G Y-G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-Y-G Y-G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-R-G R-G-R-O-R G-R-O-R-Y R-O-R-Y-Y R-Y-Y-R-G Y-R-G-R-O R-G-R-O-Y G-R-O-Y-Y O-Y-Y-O-R Y-Y-O-R-R
Parent:
K-O-R-G-R-G-Y-G-Y-G-Y-G-R-G-R-O-R-Y-Y-R-G-R-O-Y-Y-O-R-R-K
So far the evidence is consistent with Amtep#8 being identical to Amtep#2, with just one weak spot in the chain. If it's identical, then it probably means repeated applications of a mutagen do nothing.
G-R-G-R-O G-R-G-Y-G G-Y-G-R-G R-G-R-O-R R-Y-Y-R-G Y-G-R-G-R (2x) Y-G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G (2x) O-R-G (2x) O-R-R O-R-Y (2x) R-G-R R-O-R R-O-Y R-R-K R-Y-Y (2x) Y-G-R Y-R-G
Preliminary chaining:
O-R-G R-G-R G-R-G-Y-G Y-G-Y-G-Y G-Y-G-R-G Y-G-R-G-R G-R-G-R-O R-G-R-O-R O-R-Y R-Y-Y-R-G R-G-R R-O-Y ... R-R-K
Parent:
K-O-R-G-R-G-Y-G-Y-G-Y-G-R-G-R-O-R-Y-Y-R-G-R-O-Y-Y-O-R-R-K
Like with Amtep#8, it fits the parent so far, but the evidence is still weak.
K-Y-O-O-O Y-O-O-O-Y O-O-O-Y-K
Pretty simple :)
Original Royal Tower vine:
K-Y-O-R-O-Y-KMutation:
K-Y-O-O-O-Y-K
K-Y-O Y-O-R-R-Y O-R-R-Y-K
Original Royal Tower vine:
K-Y-O-R-O-Y-KMutation:
K-Y-O-R-R-Y-K