Cited by 162Insurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

Longevity and the costs of reproduction in a historical human population

Open access
Lycett, J.E, Dunbar, R.I.M, Voland, E·2000·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

It has been argued that the priority that natural selection places on reproduction negatively affects other processes such as longevity and the problem posed by this trade-off underlies the disposable soma theory for the evolution of human ageing. Here we examine the relationship between reproduction and longevity in a historical human population (the Krummhörn, north-west Germany 1720-1870). In our initial analyses, we found no support for the hypothesized negative effects of reproduction on longevity: married women who remained childless lived no longer than women who reproduced and women who had few children lived no longer than women who had many children. However, more detailed analyses in relation to socio-economic class revealed that the extent to which reproduction has an effect on longevity is a function of the level of economic deprivation. We found that, when possible sources of confound were controlled for (e.g. duration of marriage and amount of time spent in fecund marriage), there is an increasingly strong relationship between longevity and reproduction with increasing poverty.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2000.0962

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • Lycett et al. reported a negative relationship between fecundity and longevity for women with low access to resources.

    “Indeed, Lycett et al. (2000) reported a negative relationship between fecundity and longevity for women with low access to resources.”

    From Endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome are diametric disorders (2021) · cites this paper as Lycett et al., 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lycett, J. E., Dunbar, R. I. M., & Voland, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
Corresponding author
Lycett, J.E
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2000-01-07
Volume
267
Issue
1438
Pages
31-35
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2064306165
Cited by
162
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
FWCI
23.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Insurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
longevity, reproduction, disposable soma theory, human aging, fertility, childlessness, socioeconomic class, poverty
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Female, Germany, Humans, Longevity, Male, Marriage, Reproduction, Selection, Genetic, Social Class, Databases, Factual, History, 18th Century, History, 19th Century

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