3 ms·

I would think that the microbiome is so heavily influenced by one's environment (what they ingest, etc) that things like gender wouldn't matter so much. Conside

by jghn 12y ago

I would think that the microbiome is so heavily influenced by one's environment (what they ingest, etc) that things like gender wouldn't matter so much. Considering that it's fairly easy to determine things like when someone traveled by simply looking at time series data of their microbiome, locality and diet would be the things that I'd expect to see differentiated.

TrainedMonkey 12y ago
Article concludes weaker statement as well: "It turns out that in our dataset, there is no statistically significant difference between male microbiomes and female microbiomes. And, given a random sample, we would not be able to determine if it came from a man or a woman."
- Panoramix 12y ago
  I found that completely unsurprising
  - stcredzero 12y ago
    It's about as unsurprising as the MythBusters finding that both men and women fart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mNU6MFQP1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mNU6MFQP1k
- gojomo 12y ago
  I suspect they could do better than random chance in guessing the gender of the sample source. Their tables show pretty big differences in the categories Actinobacteria (73% more in men) and Verrucomicrobia (88% more in women). Maybe their sample is so small even these very different averages are just attributable to random chance, but it seems they've made a conscious choice not to reveal the size of their database.
whoopdedo 12y ago
I wasn't sure. At first I would have assumed there to be a small but significant difference. The difference in hormones should create distinct environments so a bacterium that can take advantage of that difference would be more likely to occur in one sex than the other. Probably the male as female is the default sex. (Is there any species that starts as male?) What this tells me is that animals are conservative with their hormones. Allowing arbitrary proteins to seep into our gut would be wasteful. There's also that if we allowed bacteria to be affected by our sex hormones, that would also make our reproduction susceptible to alteration by those bacteria. Natural selection cuts the finest when it comes to the genes involved in procreation. So it should be rare to find a symbiotic organism with a sex organ. Viral organisms of course don't care if the host dies, or can't have babies.
- gus_massa 12y ago
  > Is there any species that starts as male? I remember an article about mollusks. I searched and found this: http://phys.org/news/2012-09-team-mollusk-gender-ages.html http://phys.org/news/2012-09-team-mollusk-gender-ages.html Also, from Wikipedia, many fishes change from male to female, for example clownfish (aka Nemo): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change#In_animals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change#In_animals
- WalterSear 12y ago
  Female isn't the 'default' sex. Both estrogens and androgens affect foetal development from the early stages. It's a myth, like synchronizing menstrual periods.

by jghn 12y ago

TrainedMonkey 12y ago

Article concludes weaker statement as well: "It turns out that in our dataset, there is no statistically significant difference between male microbiomes and female microbiomes. And, given a random sample, we would not be able to determine if it came from a man or a woman."

Panoramix 12y ago
I found that completely unsurprising
- stcredzero 12y ago
  It's about as unsurprising as the MythBusters finding that both men and women fart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mNU6MFQP1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mNU6MFQP1k
gojomo 12y ago
I suspect they could do better than random chance in guessing the gender of the sample source. Their tables show pretty big differences in the categories Actinobacteria (73% more in men) and Verrucomicrobia (88% more in women). Maybe their sample is so small even these very different averages are just attributable to random chance, but it seems they've made a conscious choice not to reveal the size of their database.

whoopdedo 12y ago

I wasn't sure. At first I would have assumed there to be a small but significant difference. The difference in hormones should create distinct environments so a bacterium that can take advantage of that difference would be more likely to occur in one sex than the other. Probably the male as female is the default sex. (Is there any species that starts as male?) What this tells me is that animals are conservative with their hormones. Allowing arbitrary proteins to seep into our gut would be wasteful. There's also that if we allowed bacteria to be affected by our sex hormones, that would also make our reproduction susceptible to alteration by those bacteria. Natural selection cuts the finest when it comes to the genes involved in procreation. So it should be rare to find a symbiotic organism with a sex organ. Viral organisms of course don't care if the host dies, or can't have babies.

gus_massa 12y ago
> Is there any species that starts as male? I remember an article about mollusks. I searched and found this: http://phys.org/news/2012-09-team-mollusk-gender-ages.html http://phys.org/news/2012-09-team-mollusk-gender-ages.html Also, from Wikipedia, many fishes change from male to female, for example clownfish (aka Nemo): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change#In_animals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change#In_animals
WalterSear 12y ago
Female isn't the 'default' sex. Both estrogens and androgens affect foetal development from the early stages. It's a myth, like synchronizing menstrual periods.