via [personal profile] oursin, something I found interesting: We still don't understand family resemblance, and some of what we thought we knew is mistaken, or might be.

This article describes research that used data from almost a million people: every Norwegian student who took a standardized test from 2007-2019.

Quoting the article: "The resemblance of twins cannot be reconciled with any model....The resemblance of adoptees cannot be reconciled with any model."

Adjusting a model to account better for twins makes it a poorer match of adoptive relationships, and vice versa. Any attempt to account for one of these moves the model away adopted siblings makes it fit twins less well, and vice versa.

In addition to comparing twins, other biological siblings, and adoptees, this study looked at "in-law relationships": step-siblings and step-cousins. It sounds like a lot of previous work used only biological relatives, even work that used large biological pedigrees, and genetic models fit pretty well there except for twins. In this study that compares adopted siblings and step-siblings, shared environments appear to mimic genetic transmission. So we don't really know how much of people's resemblance to their biological kin is genetic.

I was surprised to find that even a purely genetic model doesn't adequately explain the resemblance between monozygotic twins, or entirely explain why the correlation is higher than between dizygotic ("non-identical") twin pairs.
Tags:
radiantfracture: Beadwork bunny head (Default)

From: [personal profile] radiantfracture


I love this! Anything that pokes holes in genetic absolutism.
ethelmay: (Default)

From: [personal profile] ethelmay


I don't understand what they mean about monozygotic twins having higher than expected correlation. What was the expectation, and how was it arrived at? As a lay person, I expect identical twins to be, if not indistinguishable, very much alike.
otter: (Default)

From: [personal profile] otter


I didn't read far enough to see if they say what types of resemblance they are looking at - facial features, career choices, education level, chronic illness? Could be so many things
ethelmay: (Default)

From: [personal profile] ethelmay


I have read (though it was very old research) that identical twins raised apart sometimes resemble each other more in choices such as which musical instrument to study, because they aren't trying to differentiate from one another.
conuly: (Default)

From: [personal profile] conuly


Although every time we read one of those articles I'm forced to remember a few things, such as "well, if they weren't remarkably similar nobody would care" and "they were raised five miles apart in a state that loves basketball and are each six foot three, of course they play basketball" and "I don't know, what're the odds that somebody born in 1978 might marry a woman named Jennifer? Can't be that amazing, can it?"
ethelmay: (Default)

From: [personal profile] ethelmay


Our old next-door neighbor had four daughters and all of her sons-in-law were called Bob.
.

About Me

redbird: closeup of me drinking tea, in a friend's kitchen (Default)
Redbird

Most-used tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style credit

Expand cut tags

No cut tags