Comments on: The Impact Of Polygyny On Human Genetic Variation

By: anthrogenetics

anthrogenetics — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 14:42:11 +0000

Now, there are at least two groups of researchers challenge Hammer’s view and they view that polygyny was not an important factor in human evolutionary history influencing genetic variation. In fact, Hammer and his colleagues say that, in addition to the practice of polygyny, other polygynous processes (not clear what they are) and other demographic factors can also explain the observed pattern of female-to-male effective population size ratio. Hammer and his colleagues also considered how female gene flow affected the ratio, but they did not consider this thoroughly.

http://anthrogenetics.wordpress.com/tag/x-chromosome/

By: anthrogenetics

anthrogenetics — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:23:57 +0000

I have been thinking about this for a while and this topic is a part my research project. I cannot believe that polygyny had that big effect to make big difference in effective population size between male and female. I always believed that variance in reproductive success due to polygyny is not that big among human, because compared to monogamous males, only a few males (very rich men, maybe) successfully had multiple wives and significantly more children who survive until their reproductive age to reproduce more children. Some males have more children, but it does not means their children survive until their reproductive age to reproduce. Contrary to the authors of the article (Hammer and his colleagues), I think female gene flow was more important factor influencing X chromosome and mtDNA variation. What do you guys think? Does anybody have comment on this?

By: Karl Aritz

Karl Aritz — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:32:12 +0000

Is it possible that there a selective advantage to alternating periods of polygenic matings and offspring to provide fathers with presumably better phenotypes; and THEN the social group reverts to monogynic reproduction to avoid consaguinity?

IF so then the open and legal monogamy and polygyny of countries where polygamy is legal today might be better statistical studies than the children of modern “Edens.”

By: Luis

Luis — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:07:12 +0000

Oops… the Biaka (Pygmies) are also hunter-gatherers and they show a more average “polygynistic” trend (almost as high as the Han and Mandenka). Still hunter-gatherers appear to show the lower levels of this trend overall.

By: Luis

Luis — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:27:02 +0000

I also have the same question. We know that Melanesians tend to be polygynic (I’m thinking of Papuans specifically) but the other high “polygyny” group are Northern Basques (the only European pop. sampled) and there is no record of Basques practicing polygamy at all (instead the monogamic household is a national institution).

Humboldt instead mentioned in the early 19th century that pre-marriage promiscuity was common amon Basques and that marriages often happened when the girl became pregnant (not necesarily of her primary boyfriend, but hard to know). We know also that deeper in the past (as late as the 16th century) Basques practiced pagan or “witchcraft” ceremonies that were pretty much orgiastic (community sex on friday night under the influence of drugs, possibly stramonium).

So I do suspect that this “polygynic” reproductive bias can be achieved by very different means: either by the typical patriarchal “harem” or by the less obvious women-led selection of prefered fathers in a relatively promiscuous context.

The lowest level of “polygynic” bias was shown, maybe meaningfully, by the only hunter-gatherer sample: the Bushmen (San), who do not appear (AFAIK) to be either polygamous nor particularly promiscuous.

By: ArcAsa

ArcAsa — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:55:31 +0000

Interesting. I have often had some trouble with genetic studies of human populations in prehistory since they seldom take complicated factors such as continual intermarriage across ethnic groups, kinship systems, or adultery/rape/prostitution into account IMO.

Question: Some modern studies have shown that a lot of children do not have the father their mother claim. of course, in a repressive patriarchal system adultery by married women tends to be less but do researchers take into account that there are a lot of offspring produced ‘on the wrong side of the marital bed’? Is it only institutional polygyny, or married women taking lovers their husband do not knpw about?