The Male Sex Chromosome Isn’t Shrinking

It may be small, but the Y chromosome is here to stay

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The Y chromosome is the runt of our 46-chromosome litter. Despite its well-known role—determining whether a mammal will be male—it pales in comparison to the other chromosomes, especially its partner, X. Indeed, 200 million to 300 million years ago Y shared roughly 600 genes with X. Today they share only 19. Those losses, some geneticists noted in 2002, indicated Y was actually rotting away. Give it another 10 million years, they said, and Y would be extinct. Others then wondered whether males would go with it.

But Y has stopped shedding those genes, according to recent research, and, in fact, has been stable for the past 25 million years, says David Page, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an author of the study, which appeared in Nature. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.) Page and his colleagues found that although Y was much skimpier in more recently evolved species, the attrition had stopped millions of years ago.

That stability may come from a core of about 12 genes that have nothing to do with sex and are instead responsible for vital cellular functions in the heart, blood, lungs and other tissues. “These are powerful players in the central command room of cells,” and natural selection would favor their survival, Page says.


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.


One proponent of the rotting Y idea is not convinced. The past several million years may simply be a lull, says Jennifer Graves, a geneticist at the Australian National University. She notes that at least two rodent groups have managed to dispense with it altogether. The new research suggests, however, that Y will remain at its current, if slight, size.

Josh Fischman is senior editor for special projects at Scientific American and covers medicine, biology and science policy. He has written and edited about science and health for Discover, ScienceEarth and U.S. News & World Report. Follow Fischman on Bluesky @jfischman.bsky.social

More by Josh Fischman
Scientific American Magazine Vol 311 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Here to Stay” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 311 No. 1 (), p. 27
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0714-27

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

Subscribe