Skip to main content

comics - The X-FACTOR gene in Ultimate X-men


Reading the Ultimate X-men #15 I see that Xavier claims that "98% of all known mutants test positive for the X-FACTOR gene". Isn't the X-FACTOR gene what makes a mutant or does this simply include mutates (genetically altered individuals who wasn't born a mutant) too? Either way I think that it just sounds wrong.


If it does not include mutates then I guess there would be some other factor who defines a mutant. The only reasonably explaination, I can come up with, then would be that there are so few mutants out there that Wolverine, and the other "original" Weapon X mutates, counts as mutants but do not exhibit the X-FACTOR gene and is roughly 2% of all mutants.


If this includes mutates (such as Spider-man) 98% sounds pretty high.



Answer



When Xavier is talking about the number of mutants who test positive, he is implying that nearly all mutants who are tested, show signs of the X-factor genetic markers determined to cause active mutations. This number he estimates at 98%.




  • This implies the X-factor has been corroborated as the primary source of mutant powers in those people who are tested. Since he cannot have tested every mutant, he is basing this upon his source data of which he would probably have had the largest test pool outside of SHIELD.





  • It also implies there are mutants, who for unknown reasons, may either exhibit powers without testing positive, or have the gene and do not exhibit special abilities. This is the 2% he is talking about. Mutants whose abilities activate before or after puberty may be mistaken for mutates or have a significant variation in their genomic structure which caused the deviation from the norm.




  • Xavier does not include mutates in his genetic mapping because even though their powers are derived from the same source of genetic tampering (the Celestials), mutates require an external event to activate their powers whereas most mutants will activate their powers when they reach puberty.




Wikipedia's Mutant Entry:






  • In comic books published by Marvel Comics, a mutant is an organism (usually otherwise human) who possesses a genetic trait called an X-gene that allows the mutant to naturally develop superhuman powers and abilities. Human mutants are considered to be of the subspecies Homo sapiens superior, an evolutionary progeny of Homo sapiens, and are considered the next stage in human evolution, though whether this is true or not is a subject of much debate.




  • Unlike Marvel's mutates which are characters who develop their powers only after exposure to outside stimuli or energies (such as Hulk, Spider-Man, The Fantastic Four, and Absorbing Man), mutants are born with the genetic potential to possess their powers, although the powers typically manifest at puberty.




  • Like mutates, the powers of the vast majority of Marvel's human superheroes are the result of genetic manipulation by the Celestials millions of years in the past.






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.