Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T10:37:01.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Why so many Agta boys? Explaining ‘extreme’ sex ratios in Philippine foragers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2019

Abigail E. Page*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University College London, London, UK Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
Sarah Myers
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University College London, London, UK
Mark Dyble
Affiliation:
Jesus College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Andrea Bamberg Migliano
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University College London, London, UK Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
*
*Corresponding author. London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineKeppel Street London WC1E 7HT. E-mail: abigail.page@lshtm.ac.uk

Abstract

Male-biased sex ratios have been observed in multiple small-scale societies. Although intentional and systematic female-biased mortality has been posited as an explanation, there is often a lack of ethnographic evidence of systematic female neglect and/or infanticide. The Agta, a foraging population from the Philippines, have a skewed sex ratio of 1.29 (129 males per 100 females) aged 15 years or under. We hypothesised that this skew was not caused by greater female deaths, but due to an adaptive response, where more males were produced at birth in reaction to high male-biased extrinsic mortality. To test this hypothesis we utilise census, childcare and mortality data from 915 Agta. The Agta's sex ratio is significantly male-biased in the <1 (n = 48, 2:1) and 1–5 year (n = 170, 1.39:1) age cohorts; however, we find no evidence of systematic female neglect in patterns of childcare. Furthermore, the sex ratio decreases over cohorts, becoming balanced by the end of the juvenile period, owing to significantly higher male mortality. Taken together, these results are not supportive of female infanticide or neglect, and instead suggest an adaptive mechanism, acting in utero as a response to male-biased juvenile mortality, following Fisherian principles of equalising parental investment.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2019
Figure 0

Table 1. The juvenile sex ratios and the sample sizes on which they are based as reported by Hewlett (1991)a and Headland (1989)b – the Palanan Agta data are our own.c Apparently male-biased sex ratios are in bold

Figure 1

Table 2. Mortality statistics applied to a hypothetical population of 1000 births at year 0 (see Figure 2). The scenarios are intended for illustrative purposes only; however, the statistics are within the bounds of those documented for extant foraging populations. For instance, the average percentage of juveniles dying across 27 societies by age 16 is 35.3% (Kelly 2013: 201); in our sample 38.9% died. Sex differences in mortality have been found to range up to 14% (Kelly 2013). Mortality rates are also set to be highest in early life, as is typical of non-industrialised populations (Blurton Jones 2016). For example, in the Hadza 51.8% of deaths occurring by year 15 had occurred by year 1 and 80.5% by year 4; the equivalent figures for the Agta are 48.8% and 84.5% (Page et al. 2016). At birth sex ratios have been previously documented as being as high as 122 (Hewlett 1991).

Figure 2

Figure 1. The percentage distribution of Agta males and females across age cohorts. Yellow (bottom) portion of the bars represents males; the green (top) portion represents female. The hashed line represents a balanced sex ratio and the numbers at the bottom of the bars are the sex ratios of each age group. Error bars are 95% confidence intervals of the observed proportions based on two-tailed binomial proportion tests. Sample sizes are as follows: <1, n = 48; 1–5, n = 170; 6–15, n = 280; 16–25, n = 168; 26–35, n = 73; 36–45, n = 66; 46–55, n = 69; 56–66, n = 26; and 66+, n = 15.

Figure 3

Figure 2. (a) The sex ratio of offspring born to individual mothers – here each dot is a mother, the age of whom is represented in shading. Only mothers with two or more offspring are included. (b) The sex ratio of birth cohorts from 1990 to 2014. Sample size is indicated by dot size – the larger the dot, the larger the sample. Accuracy is increased from the 2000s onwards as the size of the birth estimates is closer to the expected 35–40 births per year. The dashed line represents a balanced sex ratio. The y-axis is log transformed owing to the nature of the distribution of sex ratios.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Population sex ratio by age cohort in a hypothetical population under differing sex-specific mortality scenarios. For full details see the Supporting Information. Lines have been dodged to assist viewing when there is significant overlapping. The dashed line represents a balanced (1:1) sex ratio. The y-axis is log transformed owing to the nature of the distribution of sex ratios.

Figure 5

Table 3. The distribution of the deaths of offspring reported by Agta mothers by sex

Supplementary material: PDF

Page et al. supplementary material

Page et al. supplementary material 1

Download Page et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 208.8 KB