{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01948051948051948, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004722550177095631, 'mean_word_length': 5.469465648854962, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 5, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A polymorphism in the oestrogen receptor gene explains covariance between digit ratio and mating behaviour

In vertebrates, including humans, the relative length of the second to the fourth digit correlates with sex hormone-dependent behavioural, psychological and physiological traits. However, despite a decade of research, the underlying mechanism linking digit ratio to these sex hormone-dependent traits remains unclear. Previous work suggests that during embryo development, circulating levels of plasma androgens or oestrogens may act through their receptors to affect transcription levels of posterior HOX genes in the developing digits, thereby possibly influencing their relative length. The correlation between digit ratio and sex hormone-dependent traits might thus stem from variation in expression or sensitivity of the sex hormone receptors, or from variation in sex hormone levels in the embryo. Here, we show that in a population of 1156 zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata, a polymorphism in the oestrogen receptor α gene (ESR1) explains 11.3 per cent of the variation in digit ratio, and is also associated with male and female-mating behaviour. By contrast, we found no associations between digit ratio or mating behaviours and polymorphisms in the androgen receptor gene. Thus, our results (i) provide an explanation for the observed significant genetic covariance between digit ratio and male and female mating behaviour and (ii) strongly confirm the indicator function of digit ratio through the oestrogen pathway. Finally, we note that the commonly invoked effect of foetal testosterone on human digit ratio seems to be substantially weaker than the effect described here.