Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   'Gay Gene' increase female fertility.
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6023 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 1 of 3 (164476)
12-01-2004 6:43 PM


Given the multifaceted interest in homosexuality-related issues in this forum, I thought the following peer-reviewed study would be of interest to many; hopefully it hasn't already been posted:
Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004 Nov 7;271(1554):2217-21.
Evidence for maternally inherited factors favouring male homosexuality and promoting female fecundity.
Camperio-Ciani A, Corna F, Capiluppi C.
Department of General Psychology, Universita di Padova, via Venezia 8, 35100 Padua, Italy. andrea.camperio@unipd.it
The Darwinian paradox of male homosexuality in humans is examined, i.e. if male homosexuality has a genetic component and homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals, then why is this trait maintained in the population? In a sample of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives (a total of over 4600 individuals), we found that female maternal relatives of homosexuals have higher fecundity than female maternal relatives of heterosexuals and that this difference is not found in female paternal relatives. The study confirms previous reports, in particular that homosexuals have more maternal than paternal male homosexual relatives, that homosexual males are more often later-born than first-born and that they have more older brothers than older sisters. We discuss the findings and their implications for current research on male homosexuality.
PMID: 15539346
Click here for PubMed entry
Essentially, female relatives of male homosexuals have more children than females without a male homosexual relative. Also, male homosexuality seems to have a general mode of maternal inheritance, which would make sense if the female fecundity aspect is a selection factor for the maintenance of the 'gay gene'.
For those who don't have access to the journal, there is also a summary at Nature Reviews Genetics:
Nature Reviews Genetics 5, 884 (2004)
Gay genes boost fertility
Tanita Casci
The worldwide press has recently rekindled the debate on sexual orientation: is it down to nature or nurture? A familiar argument from the nurture camp is this: "If male homosexuality has a genetic component and homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals, then why is this trait maintained in the population?" (The Independent, UK, 13 October, 2004). A study1 now answers precisely this question: "The genes that make men gay also help their female relatives to have bigger families" (The Times, UK, 13 October, 2004). The scientist interviewed the families of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men — a total of 4,600 individuals — and found that mothers and maternal aunts (but not paternal relatives) of the homosexuals were more fertile than those of the straight men, and also produced more gay offspring. This indicates that the gene(s) that favours homosexuality also boosts female fertility and that homosexuality is passed through the maternal line, and so might be located on the X chromosome.
But 'gay genes' might not necessarily increase fertility itself. Neuroscientist Simon LeVay suggests that the genes might in fact be involved in sexual attraction to men. "They could predispose men towards homosexuality and women towards 'hyper-heterosexuality', causing women to have more sex with men and thus have more offspring" (New Scientist, UK, 13 October, 2004).
The research team that carried out the study point out that increased fertility linked with homosexuality in males "would not explain the majority (80%) of cases" (BBC News Online, UK, 13 October, 2004), and "stressed that there was ample room left for the influence of non-biological factors linked to culture and upbringing" (Herald Sun, Australia, 14 October, 2004).
If anyone thinks this is worthy of further discussion it would probably be best to revive the Genetics of Homosexuality thread.
Enjoy.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by coffee_addict, posted 12-02-2004 3:09 AM pink sasquatch has not replied
 Message 3 by Brad McFall, posted 12-02-2004 10:55 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 2 of 3 (164581)
12-02-2004 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by pink sasquatch
12-01-2004 6:43 PM


{Edited: Off topic}
This message has been edited by Lam, 12-02-2004 03:35 AM

Hate world.
Revenge soon!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by pink sasquatch, posted 12-01-2004 6:43 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 3 of 3 (164641)
12-02-2004 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by pink sasquatch
12-01-2004 6:43 PM


I think this interest is over rated HeRe and have finally said something about it, in edit to->Peter, to prevent me,BSM, from having to comment on it eveR aVain.
EvC Forum: Evolution of complexity/information

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by pink sasquatch, posted 12-01-2004 6:43 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024