The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sex‐specific demographic behaviours that shape human genomic variation
Abstract
In the human species, the two uniparental genetic systems (mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosome) exhibit contrasting diversity patterns. It has been proposed that sex‐specific behaviours, and in particular differences in migration rate between men and women, may explain these differences. The availability of high‐density genomic data and the comparison of genetic patterns on autosomal and sex chromosomes at global and local scales allow a reassessment of the extent to which sex‐specific behaviours shape our genome. In this article, we first review studies comparing the genetic patterns at uniparental and biparental genetic systems and assess the extent to which sex‐specific migration processes explain the differences between these genetic systems. We show that differences between male and female migration rates matter, but that they are certainly not the only contributing factor. In particular, differences in effective population size between men and women are also likely to account for these differences. Then, we present and discuss three anthropological processes that may explain sex‐specific differences in effective population size and thus human genomic variation: (i) variance in reproductive success arising from, for example, polygyny; (ii) descent rules; and (iii) transmission of reproductive success.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“This suggests that the link between status and fitness detected in modern populations (e.g.44-46), also existed in ancient populations.”
From Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations (2015) · cites this paper as [46]
In the citing paper
“Previous studies have demonstrated that kinship systems, and particularly residence and descent rules, leave on their own a profound signature on uniparental genetic diversity without any need for violent competition22,23.”
From Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“For instance, patrilocality, a residence rule whereby a married couple settles in the house of the husband or his father, has been shown to reduce local Y-chromosome diversity compared to mtDNA, because men remain in their native village while women migrate between villages with their mtDNA upon marriage.”
From Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Our observation that, in addition to the effects of lineal fission type, the variance in reproductive success between groups (and its transmission to newly formed groups after a fission event) leads to a marked loss of diversity on the Y chromosome is consistent with previous studies showing that cultural transmission of reproductive success at the individual level leads to a reduction in”
From Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“This result is consistent with previous studies indicating that polygyny alone is expected to have a reduced effect on genetic diversity22,87, and would probably not be sufficient on its own to account for the male effective population size bottleneck reported by Karmin et al.1.”
From Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
1 more claim about this paper
Create a free account to see every claim other papers make about this one.
Citations
Cites
Fenner, J. N. (2005) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.20188 · Cited by 508
Bateman's principles and human sex roles
Brown, G. R., Laland, K. N., & Mulder, M. B. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005 · Cited by 295
Demographic History of Oceania Inferred from Genome-wide Data
Wollstein, A., Lao, O., Becker, C., Brauer, S., Trent, R. J., Nürnberg, P., Stoneking, M., & Kayser, M. (2010) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.10.040 · Cited by 218
From Social to Genetic Structures in Central Asia
Chaix, R., Quintana-Murci, L., Hegay, T., Hammer, M. F., Mobasher, Z., Austerlitz, F., & Heyer, E. (2007) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.10.058 · Cited by 111
Self-citationSégurel, L., Martínez-Cruz, B., Quintana-Murci, L., Balaresque, P., Georges, M., Hegay, T., Aldashev, A., Nasyrova, F., Jobling, M. A., Heyer, E., et al. (2008) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000200 · Cited by 95
Research works printed but not linked: 95
- Alexander RD, 1979, Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behaviour, 402
- 10.1073/pnas.95.25.15140 · DOI
- 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800779 · DOI
- 10.1016/0162-3095(80)90005-9 · DOI
- 10.1186/1471-2148-7-S2-S12 · DOI
- Betzig LB, 1986, Despotism and Differential Reproductive Success: A Darwinian View of Human History
- 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020122 · DOI · Paper page
- Borgerhoff Mulder M, 1988, Reproductive Success: Studies of Individual Variation in Contrasting Breeding Systems
- Borgerhoff Mulder M, 1990, Kipsigis women’s preferences for wealthy men: evidence for female choice in mammals?, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 27, 255
- 10.1007/s12110-009-9060-x · DOI
- 10.1002/evan.20088 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1178336 · DOI
- 10.1515/9781400877140 · DOI
- 10.1086/204474 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ng0109-8 · DOI
- 10.1086/425938 · DOI · Paper page
- Clutton‐Brock TH, 1988, Reproductive Success: Studies of Individual Variation in Contrasting Breeding Systems
- 10.1126/science.296.5565.69 · DOI
- 10.1038/nature10149 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2009.2041 · DOI
- 10.1071/RD01064 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00239-003-2458-x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.10.021 · DOI
- Fisher RA, 1958, The Genetic Theory of Natural Selection
- Fix AG, 1976, Comments on “On natural selection and the inheritance of wealth”, Current Anthropology, 17, 616
- Fix AG, 1999, Migration and Colonization in Human Microevolution
- 10.3378/027.083.0106 · DOI
- 10.3378/027.083.0107 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01884.x · DOI
- Frankham R, 2003, Introduction to Conservation Genetics
- 10.1073/pnas.1007997107 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.96.9.5077 · DOI
- 10.1080/0032472031000144116 · DOI
- Godelier M, 2004, Métamorphoses de la parenté
- 10.1038/ncomms1235 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000202 · DOI
- 10.1038/ng.651 · DOI
- 10.1086/202775 · DOI
- 10.1086/375453 · DOI · Paper page
- Heyer E, 2011, Comments on “The domain of the Replicators: Selection, Neutrality and Cultural Evolution” by J S Lansing and Murray P Cox, Current Anthropology, 52, 119
- 10.1016/j.tig.2005.02.007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1098/rspb.2003.2535 · DOI
- Hrdy SB, 2009, Mothers and Others: The Evolutionary Origins of Mutual Understanding
- 10.1093/beheco/arq078 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2009.0088 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.004 · DOI
- 10.1086/346065 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/molbev/msq117 · DOI
- 10.1038/ng.303 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2001.99033.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1963.tb03281.x · DOI
- 10.1093/beheco/13.3.291 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020053 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.01.029 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.05.013 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.1100723108 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.1011553108 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0710158105 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jaa.2011.06.004 · DOI
- 10.1086/203627 · DOI
- 10.1016/0162-3095(91)90024-K · DOI
- Lynch M, 1998, Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits
- 10.1007/s002650050219 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0376-6357(00)00118-2 · DOI
- 10.1177/1069397103254008 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1086/382256 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1353/hub.2006.0056 · DOI
- Murdock GP, 1967, Ethnographic Atlas
- Murphy M, 1999, Is the relationship between fertility of parents and children really weak?, Social Biology, 46, 122
- 10.1073/pnas.95.15.9047 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.170.3960.815 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0016672300010119 · DOI
- 10.1086/591690 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ng711 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.0406709102 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1533182 · DOI
- 10.1086/518446 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00238.x · DOI
- 10.1186/1479-7364-1-2-87 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/3088 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/tpbi.2002.1609 · DOI
- 10.1086/648530 · DOI
- Smouse PE, 1981, The impact of random and lineal fission of the genetic divergence of small human groups: a case study among the Yanomama, Genetics, 98, 179, 10.1093/genetics/98.1.179 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/3012 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9781139087247.012 · DOI
- 10.1086/302770 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3378/027.082.0204 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00374.x · DOI
- 10.1086/283520 · DOI
- 10.1086/203674 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.282.5394.1708 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ng1428 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/molbev/msh214 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/bies.20378 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01560.x · DOI
Cited by
Balaresque, P., Poulet, N., Cussat-Blanc, S., Gerard, P., Quintana-Murci, L., Heyer, E., & Jobling, M. A. (2015) · European Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.285 · Cited by 89
Sex‐specific genetic diversity is shaped by cultural factors in Inner Asian human populations
Marchi, N., Hegay, T., Mennecier, P., Georges, M., Laurent, R., Whitten, M., Endicott, P., Aldashev, A., Dorzhu, C., Nasyrova, F., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.23151 · Cited by 38
Guyon, L., Guez, J., Toupance, B., Heyer, E., & Chaix, R. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-47618-5 · Cited by 28
Self-citationHeyer, E., Brandenburg, J., Leonardi, M., Toupance, B., Balaresque, P., Hegay, T., Aldashev, A., & Austerlitz, F. (2015) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.22739 · Cited by 24
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- HEYER, E., CHAIX, R., PAVARD, S., & AUSTERLITZ, F.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-12-29
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 597-612
- ISSN
- 0962-1083
- 1365-294X
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 5
- Language
- en
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