Toolbox
  • User rankingRating: 4.6
  • Add to favoritesBookmark
  • Save as PDFSave as PDF
  • PrintPrint
  • EmailEmail
  • Blog ItBlog It
  • Stumble ItStumble It!
Digg It Reddit del.icio.us Save to Yahoo! bookmarks Save to Windows live Share on facebook Save to MySpace Slashdot it science news feed Add to google
- size +

Study shows male homosexuality can be explained through a specific model of Darwinian evolution

Reporting in this week's PLoS ONE, an Italian research team, consisting of Andrea Camperio Ciani and Giovanni Zanzotto at the University of Padova and Paolo Cermelli at the University of Torino, found that the evolutionary origin and maintenance of male homosexuality in human populations could be explained by a model based around the idea of sexually antagonistic selection, in which genetic factors spread in the population by giving a reproductive advantage to one sex while disadvantaging the other.
Male homosexuality is thought to be influenced by psycho-social factors, as well as having a genetic component. This is suggested by the high concordance of sexual orientation in identical twins and the fact that homosexuality is more common in males belonging to the maternal line of male homosexuals. These effects have not been shown for female homosexuality, indicating that these two phenomena may have very different origins and dynamics.

Male homosexuality is difficult to explain under Darwinian evolutionary models, because carriers of genes predisposing towards male homosexuality would be likely to reproduce less than average, suggesting that alleles influencing homosexuality should progressively disappear from a population. This changed when previous work by Camperio Ciani and collaborators, published in 2004, showed that females in the maternal line of male homosexuals were more fertile than average.

Challenged by all these empirical data, the authors of the new study published in PLoS ONE considered a range of different hypotheses for the genetic diffusion of male homosexuality. These included: the genetic maternal effects on sons, the heterozygote advantage (as is found in malaria resistance), and "sexually antagonistic selection." The latter is a particular aspect of Darwinian evolution, in which genetic factors spread in the population by giving a reproductive advantage to one sex while disadvantaging the other. This type of evolution has been previously found in insects, birds, and some mammals, but never in humans.

To discover and clarify the dynamics of the genetic factors for homosexuality, the researchers had to screen a large set of models and exclude them one by one. They concluded that the only possible model was that of sexually antagonistic selection. The other models did not fit the empirical data, either implying that the alleles would become extinct too easily or invade the population, or failing to describe the distribution patterns of male homosexuality and female fecundity observed in the families of homosexuals. Only the model of sexually antagonistic selection involving at least two genes – at least one of which must be on the X chromosome (inherited in males only through their mother) – accounted for all the known data.

The results of this model show the interaction of male homosexuality with increased female fecundity within human populations, in a complex dynamic, resulting in the maintenance of male homosexuality at stable and relatively low frequencies, and highlighting the effects of heredity through the maternal line.

These findings provide new insights into male homosexuality in humans. In particular, they promote a focus shift in which homosexuality should not be viewed as a detrimental trait (due to the reduced male fecundity it entails), but, rather, should be considered within the wider evolutionary framework of a characteristic with gender-specific benefits, and which promotes female fecundity. This may well be the evolutionary origin of this genetic trait in human beings.

The possible widespread occurrence of sexually antagonistic characteristics in evolutionary processes, which play their evolutionary game by giving a fecundity benefit to one sex while disadvantaging the other, has only recently begun to be appreciated. This is understood as a key mechanism through which high levels of genetic variation are maintained in biological populations. Male homosexuality is just the first example of an unknown number of sexually antagonistic traits, which contribute to the maintenance of the natural genetic variability of humans. The new perspectives opened by the models developed for sexually antagonistic selection may also contribute to a better understanding of most genetically-based sexual conflicts, which are, at present, poorly understood in humans.

An unexpected implication of the new models concerns the impact that the sexually antagonistic genetic factors for male homosexuality have on the overall fecundity of a population. The findings suggest that the proportion of male homosexuals may signal a corresponding proportion of females with higher fecundity. Consequently, these factors always contribute, all else being equal, a positive net increase of the fecundity of the whole population, when compared to populations in which such factors are lower or absent. This increase grows as the population baseline fecundity decreases; this means that the genes influencing male homosexuality end up playing the role of a buffer effect on any external factors lowering the overall fecundity of the whole population.

Citation: Camperio Ciani A, Cermelli P, Zanzotto G (2008) Sexually Antagonistic Selection in Human Male Homosexuality. PLoS ONE 3(6): e2282. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002282 http://www.plosone.org/doi/pone.0002282

Source: Public Library of Science
» Next Article in General Science - Biology: New study shows shallow water corals evolved from deep sea ancestors

would you recommend this story?

 

User Rating

4.6 out of 5 after 27 total votes
  • not at all
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • highly

Leave a Comment or

Rank filter

Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.
Posted by Corban 06/18/08 07:12
Rank: 3.5/5 after 2 votes
Heterosexuals exist to breed. Homosexuals exist to catalyze those who breed. Everyone has their place in life. The question is: are they in the right one?
Posted by knoxpaul 06/18/08 09:57
Rank: 3/5 after 2 votes
So:
It's Mommy's fault, after all!
Posted by Bonkers 06/18/08 11:17
Rank: 4/5 after 3 votes
Another huge genetic benefit is being in power, near to riches or royalty. Eunuchs have always guarded over harems, replaced by the equivalent (for the king) homosexual men - who have a long tradition in court due to manners and intelligence, and they don't mess with the ladies, much. Gay men can still have children, though not in the regular nuclear family manner.
BTW - how many famous gay males have children? - quite a lot i'd say, so the "zero" ascribed to their fecundity is not correct. Bright, empowered men will always be high on any girls list.

good article nevertheless, but complex subject
Posted by Sophos 06/18/08 11:27
Rank: 4.75/5 after 4 votes
Where is the mental health aspect of homosexuality
It seems this get danced around a lot.

I'm sure its not 100 % of the time but every gay I've known had some clear daddy issues and were not the most stable of individuals.
Posted by fleem 06/18/08 11:29
Rank: 3.5/5 after 2 votes
Another contributing factor might be that a heterosexual male able to well predict the feelings, and thus actions and decisions, of his mate, will reproduce better. The most efficient way to well understand the opposite sex is to use the same brain centers/functions that that opposite sex uses to BE that opposite sex. Thus there is reason for female brain functions within the male brain, and vice versa. Thus in some men those functions will be pronounced enough, possibly along with the effect this article describes, to become the primary libido.
Posted by fleem 06/18/08 11:38
Rank: 4.33/5 after 3 votes
Sophos your point is well taken but its difficult to know how much of any emotional problems might be aggravated by the effect of taboo on the homosexual's subconscious self-esteem. My personal opinion is that its a combination of BOTH taboo and internal issues that might contribute to it. In my very anecdotal experience with the few gays I've known (I'm not gay). I've noticed a ~general~ (not across the board!) correlation with a higher incident of promiscuity regardless of sexual preference. That is, The promiscuity level was generally higher in the gays I've known than the straights. Still, this is very anecdotal! And there are so many other variables that might affect that correlation, that it may not prove much.
Posted by Sophos 06/18/08 11:46
Rank: 3/5 after 1 vote
excellent retort fleem
I am not personally convinced of this, but admit it is a possibility
Posted by ontheinternets 06/18/08 14:36
Rank: 3/5 after 1 vote
Concerning the "mental health / daddy issues" point brought up, it's probably worth noting that homosexuality is not uniquely human. It is observed in other species as well.

citing wikipedia (I apologize):
http://en.wikiped..._animals
Posted by Glis 06/18/08 16:30
Rank: 4/5 after 1 vote
So the gains for the mother are two-fold. She is more fertile, which means her chances of passing her genes onto a daughter are good, and a homosexual son is more likely to stick around and help the family and less likely to be an alpha-male/die. Am I stereotyping?
Posted by Rametarin 06/18/08 19:58
Rank: 5/5 after 1 vote
ontheinternets: it doesn't have to be a uniquely human phenomenon for humans to make it uniquely human.
Posted by ontheinternets 06/18/08 21:34
Not rated yet.
Of course the causes don't have to be the same. But if you're going to approach it with Occam's Razor in play, then considering other species who have it as well is part of the process.