If you somehow became immortal how many generations of fucking your own daughters, grand daughters, great granddaughters etc would it take to create a clone? Or would the resulting children become sterile after a specific amount of generations?

Clone is like, when your in a dream

>>16695758 (OP)
Nah no reason for sterility, you could theoretically breed your recursive daughters forever.
The level of genetic variation wouldn't decline since the paternal source remains a constant static reference, unlike generational brother and sister breeding since the heterogeneity there erodes with each generation.

Some daughters will be more homogeneous depending on which they inherit and some will likely be very very similar to you.
Of course there is no capacity to improve the fitness because you can't remove any of the bad genes, you'll just get a distribution around your own average.

I've wondered for a little while but If the gods made you functionally immortal, gave you a wife and stuck you in an uninhabited land what then would be the best strategy to populate it?

>>16695758 (OP)
That's a crazy idea anon.

>>16695758 (OP)
It wouldn't happen.
Every pair of chromosomes in your dna is made by two different ones.
Let's say AB. Even if your mate is AB too, you will still have 25% of AA and 25% of BB.
If you consider you have 23 pairs of chromosomes the probability to get your own dna would still be really very low.
You would still be visibly related but more like brothers than twins.

>>16695758 (OP)
They usually become unstable fast.

Two counters come into effect: Inbreeding and Rate of Similarity of DNA.

If it's a father and daughter: It's 50% matching DNA so it compounds faster.

Usually the errors occur after getting past the 70% barrier.

So daughter/father = 50%

Then granddaughter/grandfather = 50% of 50% + 50% so 75%

Then 50% of 25% + 75% = 87.5%.

Around this point things get really fucky. Sterility is only ONE of the things that can go wrong.

If by some miracle no genetic material is damaged, then you will get close to a clone, but never 100%

He would probably be making utter shit threads on /sci/ calling for genocide sending death threats, posting about his sexual desires involving kids then having a cohort of shit eaters reaffirm his behavior as acceptable.

>>16695758 (OP)
>how many generations [...] would it take to create a clone
exactly 3

>>16695758 (OP)
32
>>16696456
wrong
>>16695875
correct

>>16695758 (OP)
Keep in mind OP, Cleopatra was also the result of generations of inbreeding, even worse inbreeding than Charles. She was so beautiful she tempted emperors.

>>16696729
charles is always brought up as some sort of horror story, but as with cleopatra you've got to look at the whole clan, charles was just one of the genetic failures that would purge itself from the bloodline.

>>16695758 (OP)
>I don't understand the concept of random mutation.

>>16696729
More beautiful than that irresistible turkish princess all the ottoman aristocrats wanted?

>>16695875
You're missing some weird quirks about genetics.

Male Y-chromosome DNA can be transcribed into X chromosomes and be inherited by daughters. You'll never get perfect clones.

>>16697140
I was not aware of that being common. but even if it does cross over to an X it won't last long unless the genes transferred have some huge benefit since the reference the paternal genome is static, most of the time any daughter will be homozygous for her father's X.

Are there any animal models where this has been studied using say stored mouse/rat semen?

>>16698270
By studies I mean of repeated generatons of back breeding to the same father.

I'm surprised no one posted that infamous /a/ graphic from some vn where the guy breeds his daughter for like 8 gens