The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Nothingland

Nothingland Something about nothing - game threads, diversions, time-wasters

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 02-23-2011, 11:50 PM   #11
ZenGum
Doctor Wtf
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
So I did some digging.
The original article is here.

We really need Pie back to cope with this kind of maths, it is WAAAAAY beyond me.
BUT! There was a link to a criticial reply, here.

They pointed out that the original paper had double-corrected for some factor and the true ratio is somewhat higher - where the original gives 1.1, 1.3 and 1.4, the correct figures should be 1.3, 2.2 and 2.6! Thus leading to the conclusion of:
Quote:
a female effective population size roughly twice that of males.
i.e females were rougly twice as likely to breed as males.

I should declare that the original authors then reply here with a bunch of stuff I cannot fathom, but they acknowledge and agree with the reply about double correcting. Either way, there is pretty good genetic evidence for widespread polygynous polygamy in human history.

Given that many societies and individuals have been monogamous, the remainder must have been definitely polygamous to make the averages work out like this.

It still does not address the serial polygyny question, though.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008.
Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.
ZenGum is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.