3 ms·
Weird. It seems like the female children would almost always propagate their genes, while the male children would either rise to the top and have many children
by seph-reed 6y ago
Weird. It seems like the female children would almost always propagate their genes, while the male children would either rise to the top and have many children or lose the competition and have very few or none.
It's always weirded me out for harem species in particular... the odds of producing a male that is competitive enough to be a harem leader seems pretty low.
- tomtomtom777 6y agoEven in harem species, on average, each male gets exactly the same number of offspring as a female. If say 75% of the specimen would be female, being a male would yield on average thrice as much children compared to a female, so it would be evolutionary beneficial to be male. The only species where the ratio is different are those where sex is determined with different genetic mechanisms. For example, in hymenoptera (ants and wasps), males are born from unfertilized eggs, which results in a 1:3 ratio between females and males.
- seph-reed 6y agoAh. The on average bit is what I was missing. It keeps going against my intuition though... like: on average, buyers of lottery tickets get back ~90% of their investment. I guess the difference between lottery tickets and genetics is that one is compulsory, with no benefit whatsoever for not playing.