Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Jul;5(7):949-964.
doi: 10.1038/s41559-021-01453-9. Epub 2021 May 3.

Meta-analytic evidence that animals rarely avoid inbreeding

Raïssa A de Boer #  1 , Regina Vega-Trejo #  2 , Alexander Kotrschal  3   4 , John L Fitzpatrick  3
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Meta-analytic evidence that animals rarely avoid inbreeding

Raïssa A de Boer et al. Nat Ecol Evol. 2021 Jul.

Abstract

Animals are usually expected to avoid mating with relatives (kin avoidance) as incestuous mating can lead to the expression of inbreeding depression. Yet, theoretical models predict that unbiased mating with regards to kinship should be common, and that under some conditions, the inclusive fitness benefits associated with inbreeding can even lead to a preference for mating with kin. This mismatch between empirical and theoretical expectations generates uncertainty as to the prevalence of inbreeding avoidance in animals. Here, we synthesized 677 effect sizes from 139 experimental studies of mate choice for kin versus non-kin in diploid animals, representing 40 years of research, using a meta-analytical approach. Our meta-analysis revealed little support for the widely held view that animals avoid mating with kin, despite clear evidence of publication bias. Instead, unbiased mating with regards to kinship appears widespread across animals and experimental conditions. The significance of a variety of moderators was explored using meta-regressions, revealing that the degree of relatedness and prior experience with kin explained some variation in the effect sizes. Yet, we found no difference in kin avoidance between males and females, choice and no-choice experiments, mated and virgin animals or between humans and animals. Our findings highlight the need to rethink the widely held view that inbreeding avoidance is a given in experimental studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kokko, H. & Ots, I. When not to avoid inbreeding. Evolution 60, 467–475 (2006). - PubMed
    1. Blouin, S. F. & Blouin, M. Inbreeding avoidance behaviors. Trends Ecol. Evol. 3, 230–233 (1988). - PubMed - DOI
    1. Pusey, A. & Wolf, M. Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 201–206 (1996). - PubMed - DOI
    1. Keller, L. & Waller, D. M. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 230–241 (2002). - DOI
    1. Szulkin, M., Stopher, K. V., Pemberton, J. M. & Reid, J. M. Inbreeding avoidance, tolerance, or preference in animals? Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 205–211 (2013). - PubMed - DOI

Publication types