Realism and robustness require increased sample size when studying both sexes

Szymon M. Drobniak,Malgorzata Lagisz,Yefeng Yang,Shinichi Nakagawa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002456

IF: 9.8

2024-04-12

PLoS Biology

Abstract:There are 2 major reasons why males and females have different variances in their traits and responses. The one is due to Taylor's law, where an increase in variance accompanies an increase in a mean. The law was first used to describe organismal aggregation patterns, but this mean–variance relationship seems to be ubiquitous [4]. Often correlations are over 0.9 between mean and variance (standard deviation) on the logarithm scale, as shown in an example data from a meta-analysis on rodent diet manipulations [5] (Fig 1A–1C). Taylor's law means that when there are sex differences in mean, there are also unavoidable differences in variances (i.e., heteroscedasticity). In their simulation, Philips and colleagues showed that a sex difference in treatment effects would usually increase statistical power. Yet, heteroscedasticity reduces power (see the next section). Given the empirically observed widespread mean–variance relationship, biologists often use CV (coefficient of variation; a mean standardised standard deviation) to compare variability among traits and responses. The other reason is an evolutionary inevitability, where 2 sexes have been subject to different natural and sexual selection forces. Indeed, the evolutionary and biomedical literature comparing CVs has found clear and widespread differences between sexes [6,7]. Of relevance, we have demonstrated this very point in mice [8,9]. Therefore, even if there are no sex differences in mean, we should expect heteroscedasticity between the 2 sexes.

biochemistry & molecular biology,biology