↓ Skip to main content

A father effect explains sex-ratio bias

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
56 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
A father effect explains sex-ratio bias
Published in
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2017
DOI 10.1098/rspb.2017.1159
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aurelio F. Malo, Felipe Martinez-Pastor, Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez, Julián Garde, Jonathan D. Ballou, Robert C. Lacy

Abstract

Sex ratio allocation has important fitness consequences, and theory predicts that parents should adjust offspring sex ratio in cases where the fitness returns of producing male and female offspring vary. The ability of fathers to bias offspring sex ratios has traditionally been dismissed given the expectation of an equal proportion of X- and Y-chromosome-bearing sperm (CBS) in ejaculates due to segregation of sex chromosomes at meiosis. This expectation has been recently refuted. Here we used Peromyscus leucopus to demonstrate that sex ratio is explained by an exclusive effect of the father, and suggest a likely mechanism by which male-driven sex-ratio bias is attained. We identified a male sperm morphological marker that is associated with the mechanism leading to sex ratio bias; differences among males in the sperm nucleus area (a proxy for the sex chromosome that the sperm contains) explain 22% variation in litter sex ratio. We further show the role played by the sperm nucleus area as a mediator in the relationship between individual genetic variation and sex-ratio bias. Fathers with high levels of genetic variation had ejaculates with a higher proportion of sperm with small nuclei area. This, in turn, led to siring a higher proportion of sons (25% increase in sons per 0.1 decrease in the inbreeding coefficient). Our results reveal a plausible mechanism underlying unexplored male-driven sex-ratio biases. We also discuss why this pattern of paternal bias can be adaptive. This research puts to rest the idea that father contribution to sex ratio variation should be disregarded in vertebrates, and will stimulate research on evolutionary constraints to sex ratios-for example, whether fathers and mothers have divergent, coinciding, or neutral sex allocation interests. Finally, these results offer a potential explanation for those intriguing cases in which there are sex ratio biases, such as in humans.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Student > Master 5 8%
Lecturer 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 47%
Environmental Science 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 154. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2021.
All research outputs
#162,780
of 18,812,015 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#440
of 9,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,817
of 281,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#15
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,812,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,058 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.