The headline is total clickbait. The abstract of the paper says: "In contrast to demographic reconstructions based on mtDNA, we infer a second strong bottlene

The headline is total clickbait. The abstract of the paper says: "In contrast to demographic reconstructions based on mtDNA, we infer a second strong bottleneck in Y-chromosome lineages dating to the last 10 ky. We hypothesize that this bottleneck is caused by cultural changes affecting variance of reproductive success among males." "caused by cultural changes affecting variance of reproductive success among males" is a reasonable hypothesis, since the bottleneck affected males more than females. But who pulled "wealth and power" out of their rear end? That's just one possible cultural change. And why would you lead with one possible version of a hypothesis rather than the actual data and results (which are interesting in their own right)? There are lots of possible ways that cultural changes could have caused a male-specific pattern of reproductive variance. Maybe settling down into agricultural societies changed how (and how much) men fought and died in conflict. There are lots of possibilities; "wealth and power" is a total guess. But that's the part that makes it into the headline.