Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago


The Scientific Fundamentalist

A Look at the Hard Truths About Human Nature
by Satoshi Kanazawa

Why Are Older Parents More Likely to Have Daughters?
 
Once again, parents are more crucial to sons than to daughters

Published on April 17, 2011 by Satoshi Kanazawa in The Scientific Fundamentalist

One of the consistent findings in the field of reproductive medicine is that older parents are more likely to have daughters. Why?
Previous studies have repeatedly found that one of the reliable predictors of the sex of the offspring is the age of the parent. Older parents are significantly more likely to have daughters than younger parents.

The National Child Development Study replicates these findings from earlier studies. As the following graph shows, the association between the age of the parent and the sex of the first child is not monotonic, but there is a general decline in the proportion of sons as the parents get older. Teenage parents are particularly likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .5327, and older parents over the age of 40 are significantly less likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .3557. Two-thirds of children born to parents over 40 are girls! The bivariate correlation between the probability of having a son and the age of the parent is significantly negative (r = -.030, p < .001, n = 9,301). Each year in the parent’s age decreases the odds of having a son as the first child by 1%.

UserPostedImage

As you can see in the following two graphs, the association between the age of the parents and the sex of the first child is stronger among women than among men. In fact, the bivariate correlation between the probability of having a son and the age of the parent is only statistically significantly negative among women (r = -.34, p < .05, n = 4,864), not among men (r = -.024, ns, n = 4,437). Among women, each year in age decreases the odds of having a son as the first child by 1.2%. However, the graph below clearly shows that fathers over the age of 40 are significantly less likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .3592.

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

Given the prevalence of age homogamy, where the age of the mother and the age of the father are generally positively correlated such that younger women are typically married to younger men and older women are typically married to older men, the slight sex difference in the pattern is not important. The overall picture is that the older the parents (both the mother and the father), the more likely they are to have a daughter. The question is: why?

Because both the quality of the eggs and the quality of the sperm decrease with age, it is tempting to explain the declining likelihood of having a son among older parents potentially in terms of such quality of gametes (although I’m not aware of any argument that suggests that lower-quality gametes are more likely to produce girls). However, such explanations, even when correct, are proximate, not ultimate. They answer the question of how; they don’t answer the question of why. The lower quality of gametes, if it indeed lowers the probability of producing boys, is the mechanism that evolution employs to make sure that older parents are more likely to have daughters. But such a proximate mechanism does not explain why evolution “wanted” to make sure that older parents are more likely to have daughters, in other words, why it is adaptive for older parents to have daughters, not sons. That requires an ultimate evolutionary explanation.

As I explain in an earlier post, parental investment is much more crucial for the future reproductive success of sons than for that of daughters. Sons’ reproductive success largely hinges on the status and resources that they inherit from their parents, particularly, their fathers. This is why the presence of sons deters divorce and the departure of the father from the family. Sons therefore need parents to invest in them, to make sure that they inherit the status and the resources of the family.

In sharp contrast, daughters’ future reproductive success is largely determined by their youth and physical attractiveness. Once they are conceived with particular genes that influence their physical attractiveness, there is very little that parents can do to increase their daughters’ future reproductive success, beyond keeping them alive and healthy. There is absolutely nothing that parents can do to affect the progression of time that determines the daughters’ age, nor is there anything they can do after the conception to influence the daughters’ physical appearance (once again, beyond keeping them healthy).

The problem with older parents, of course, is that they are more likely to die sooner. If the parents die before the children reach sexual maturity, it will have a greater negative impact on sons’ future reproductive success than on daughters’. This may be one evolutionary, ultimate reason why older parents are more likely to have daughters. Parents may be evolutionarily designed to have more daughters when they are older, so that, when they die, they are less likely to leave sons who have not sexually matured. Being orphaned young is bad both for boys and girls, but it’s much worse for boys than for girls.


UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
wpr (5h) : yooper
Zero2Cool (5h) : next is create topic from headline
Zero2Cool (5h) : new site has recent topics and headlines now
buckeyepackfan (5h) : Micah wearing #1, Packers offered it to him. Curly only one to wear #1
Zero2Cool (6h) : Micah said he told Rasheed he's gonna get some practice. LT1 yeah?
Zero2Cool (7h) : Patriots release Jabrill Peppers Before 2025 Season
Mucky Tundra (7h) : yooper!
Zero2Cool (9h) : Never. But gonna be looking different in few days :D
yooperfan (9h) : Whew, I got it back. I was afraid that I lost this site for good.
Zero2Cool (10h) : Harrisburg Packers
Mucky Tundra (10h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (11h) : No.
dfosterf (11h) : The man carried us a lot of the time
dfosterf (11h) : I think a Kenny Clark tribute is in order
Zero2Cool (19h) : new site, text editor gooder even on phone
beast (20h) : Oh yes, sometimes they make using a cellphone tough. I just wanted to make sure it was the correct article, & thank you for pointing it out.
jdlax (21h) : I can't believe one of my teams went out and wablammo just up and acquired one of the best players in the world overnight
dfosterf (29-Aug) : I do very much appreciate when Beast and others pick up my slack 😊
dfosterf (29-Aug) : I accept Beast's admonishment regarding my failure to link stuff I reference. I simply never learned to link from my cell phone.
beast (29-Aug) : That's not what your she said 😌, she said keep going 😏
Mucky Tundra (29-Aug) : Anything over 4 hours means he needs to get to the hospital
Mucky Tundra (29-Aug) : Someone might want to check on Hafley and make sure his erection has gone down
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : LaFleur texts "bleep me I cannot sit down"
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : YouTube has had me last hour or two lol
Mucky Tundra (28-Aug) : Ugh this trade happened right as my shift started and it's killing me
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : Parsons wore 23 in high school.
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : Packers just cost Lions more money with Hutchinson too huh
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : That is fair by me.
buckeyepackfan (28-Aug) : Kenny Clark is the player, 2 1st rnd picks
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : umm... what?
wpr (28-Aug) : I am stunned
Mucky Tundra (28-Aug) : RICKEY SCOOPS WAS RIGHT AGAIN!!!
Mucky Tundra (28-Aug) : ITS HAPPENING
buckeyepackfan (28-Aug) : DEAL IS DONE
buckeyepackfan (28-Aug) : MICAH IS COMING TO GREEN BAY!!!!!!!!!
wpr (28-Aug) : Me do-ed it gooderly,
Zero2Cool (28-Aug) : Bahah, I was like WTF why isn't anyone posting on PP.com ... oops no one has permissions
dfosterf (27-Aug) : tell her I reckon
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Micah Robinson cut. Probable PS player tomorrow. Has to call mom back and t
Zero2Cool (27-Aug) : New site so much better. Might make switch and deal with it.
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Mecole Hardman to our practice squad
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Nick Nieman from Texans our 5th linebacker. Special teams signing
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Looks like we signed Clayton Tune as QB3
wpr (27-Aug) : TKT people lose their minds over QB3. Point is almost none of them are ready that's why they are on the PS and other teams don't take them.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Unfortunately he doesn't seem ready to be an emergency QB.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : As a Canadian and a follower of Canadian University football. I am rooting for him
dfosterf (27-Aug) : I bet a lot of us will follow the Taylor Elgersma journey with interest. Personally, got a Kurt Warner vibe goin' on. I like him
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Not sure if either will be claimed though.
TheKanataThrilla (27-Aug) : Tune or Hooker would make sense
dfosterf (27-Aug) : Clayton Tune cut by the Cards? Don't know if that's the guy, we shall see
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Random Babble / dfosterf

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

28-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

27-Aug / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

27-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

27-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.