ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
The battle of the sexes in humans is highly polygenic.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Reverse genetics of sexual antagonism.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- Drivers of systemic male-female allele frequency divergence in humans.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Testing the Mother's Curse Hypothesis in Human Mitochondrial Genome Evolution.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Pervasive fitness trade-offs revealed by rapid adaptation to shifting population densities in large experimental populations ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Profile of Mark Kirkpatrick.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- No evidence for sex-differential transcriptomes driving genome-wide sex-differential natural selection.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- The battle of the sexes in humans is highly polygenic.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sex-differential selection (SDS), which occurs when the fitness effects of alleles differ between males and females, can have profound impacts on the maintenance of genetic variation, disease risk, and other key aspects of natural populations. Because the sexes mix their autosomal genomes each generation, quantifying SDS is not possible using conventional population genetic approaches. Here, we introduce a method that exploits subtle sex differences in haplotype frequencies resulting from SDS acting in the current generation. Using data from 300K individuals in the UK Biobank, we estimate the strength of SDS throughout the genome. While only a handful of loci under SDS are individually significant, we uncover highly polygenic signals of genome-wide SDS for both viability and fecundity. Selection coefficients of [Formula: see text] may be typical. Despite its ubiquity, SDS may impose a mortality load of less than 1%. An interesting life-history tradeoff emerges: Alleles that increase viability more strongly in females than males tend to increase fecundity more strongly in males than in females. Finally, we find marginal evidence of SDS on fecundity acting on alleles affecting arm fat-free mass. Taken together, our findings connect the long-standing evidence of SDS acting on human phenotypes with its impact on the genome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.