Male Bias in Distributions of Additive Genetic, Residual, and Phenotypic Variances of Shared Traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a shared genetic architecture between males and females, sexual differences are widespread. The extent of this shared genetic architecture, reflected in the intersexual genetic correlation, has previously been correlated with the extent of phenotypic sexual dimorphism in shared traits. However, the magnitude of the difference in sex-specific additive genetic variances may also fuel sexual dimorphism. To explore the correlation between additive genetic variance dimorphism and phenotypic dimorphism, we conducted a literature search. We targeted traits expressed in both sexes and excluded sex-limited traits. The mean difference between the sexes in additive genetic variance was not significantly different from 0. However, the distribution of the sexual difference in additive genetic variance had a significant male-biased skew. This pattern persists even after removing traits explicitly related to reproduction. Furthermore, male traits had more residual and phenotypic variance than homologous female traits (as measured by both the mean and the skew), and this difference was not necessarily due to the difference between sexual traits and nonsexual traits. We found no evidence that sex chromosome system could explain sex differences in additive genetic, nonadditive genetic, or phenotypic variances. Finally, we found a significant correlation between the extent of sexual dimorphism in additive genetic variances and the extent of phenotypic sexual dimorphism. Understanding why traits have sex-specific patterns of variation awaits further investigation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".