4.8 Article

Widespread male sex bias in mammal fossil and museum collections

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1903275116

Keywords

sex ratio; sex bias; bison; brown bears; ancient DNA

Funding

  1. Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarships
  2. University of Adelaide Research Fellowship
  3. Australian Research Council
  4. Polish National Science Centre [2013/11/B/NZ8/00914, N N304 301940, 2015/17/N/ST10/01707]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A recent study of mammoth subfossil remains has demonstrated the potential of using relatively low-coverage high-throughput DNA sequencing to genetically sex specimens, revealing a strong male-biased sex ratio [P. Pecnerova et al., Curr. Biol. 27, 3505-3510.e3 (2017)]. Similar patterns were predicted for steppe bison, based on their analogous female herd-based structure. We genetically sexed subfossil remains of 186 Holarctic bison (Bison spp.), and also 91 brown bears (Ursus arctos), which are not female herd-based, and found that similar to 75% of both groups were male, very close to the ratio observed in mammoths (72%). This large deviation from a 1:1 ratio was unexpected, but we found no evidence for sex differences with respect to DNA preservation, sample age, material type, or overall spatial distribution. We further examined ratios of male and female specimens from 4 large museum mammal collections and found a strong male bias, observable in almost all mammalian orders. We suggest that, in mammals at least, 1) wider male geographic ranges can lead to considerably increased chances of detection in fossil studies, and 2) sexual dimorphic behavior or appearance can facilitate a considerable sex bias in fossil and modern collections, on a previously unacknowledged scale. This finding has major implications for a wide range of studies of fossil and museum material.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available