Cited by 133Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Mammalian monogamy is not controlled by a single gene

Open access
Fink, Sabine, Excoffier, Laurent, Heckel, Gerald·2006·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Complex social behavior in Microtus voles and other mammals has been postulated to be under the direct genetic control of a single locus: the arginine vasopressin 1a receptor (avpr1a) gene. Using a phylogenetic approach, we show that a repetitive element in the promoter region of avpr1a, which reportedly causes social monogamy, is actually widespread in nonmonogamous Microtus and other rodents. There was no evidence for intraspecific polymorphism in regard to the presence or absence of the repetitive element. Among 25 rodent species studied, the element was absent in only two closely related nonmonogamous species, indicating that this absence is certainly the result of an evolutionarily recent loss. Our analyses further demonstrate that the repetitive structures upstream of the avpr1a gene in humans and primates, which have been associated with social bonding, are evolutionarily distinct from those in rodents. Our evolutionary approach reveals that monogamy in rodents is not controlled by a single polymorphism in the promoter region of the avpr1a gene. We thus resolve the contradiction between the claims for an evolutionarily conserved genetic programming of social behavior in mammals and the vast evidence for highly complex and flexible mating systems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0602380103

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Length per se does not predict social organization of other Microtus species.

    “However, it is now known that length per se does not predict social organization of other Microtus species [29, 32], and sequence variation within the microsatellite may have a greater influence on expression than length itself [3].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fink, S., Excoffier, L., & Heckel, G.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2006-07-18
Volume
103
Issue
29
Pages
10956-10960
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2012695658
Cited by
133
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
18.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
social monogamy, Microtus voles, social behavior genetics, gene loss, social bonding
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Molecular Sequence Data, Phylogeny, Rodentia, Sexual Behavior, Animal, Social Behavior, Receptors, Vasopressin, Cytochromes b

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review