September 1, 2008

Is Fidelity in our Genes?

A gene that promotes monogamy in rodents may do the same in humans. Researchers think variation in this gene may help predict your man's ability to commit

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Mind

Apple | Spotify | RSS

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]

Did you ever wonder why some guys are less cut out for commitment, while others stick around?

Well, in a type of rodent called a vole, one thing that controls mate bonding is a brain chemical called vasopressin. A gene that influences vasopressin determines how doggedly males will latch on to a lucky female. Scientists can even make promiscuous voles turn monogamous—just by manipulating the gene.

This week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences researchers report a link between variation in the human gene and male fidelity.

Nearly two thousand Swedes filled out a standardized test measuring the strength of their romantic partnership.

Men with a particular variant of the gene scored lower than others on the bonding scale, and fewer of them were married. What's more, if a guy had two copies of that variant he was twice as likely to report marital problems.

Ladies, don't fret just yet. It’s just a correlation that they’ve found. Stronger evidence of a causal relationship between DNA and vasopressin in humans is needed.

But in the meantime, hopeful single guys out there may want to hold off on posting their genetic code on Facebook.

- Rachel Dvoskin

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

60-Second Psych is a weekly podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American