Skip to main content
Log in

Male and Female Nipples as a Test Case for the Assumption that Functional Features Vary Less than Nonfunctional Byproducts

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Evolutionary researchers have sometimes taken findings of low variation in the size or shape of a biological feature to indicate that it is functional and under strong evolutionary selection, and have assumed that high variation implies weak or absent selection and therefore lack of function.

Methods

To test this assumption we compared the size variation (using a mean-adjusted measure of absolute variability) of the functional human female nipple (defined as the nipple-areola complex) with that of the non-functional human male nipple.

Results

We found that female nipples were significantly more variable than male nipples, even after controlling for body mass index, testing-room temperature, bust size in women, and chest size in men.

Conclusions

Morphological variation in a feature should not be used by itself to infer whether or not the feature is functional or under selection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • An, H. Y., Kim, K. S., Yu, I. K., Kim, K. W., & Kim, H. H. (2010). The nipple-areolar complex: A pictorial review of common and uncommon conditions. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 29(1), 949–962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, P. W., Gangestad, S. W., & Matthews, D. (2002). Adaptationism--how to carry out an exaptationist program. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(4; Discussion 504–453), 489–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M. (2015). Female choice and the evolution of penis size. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(7), 1749–1750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broberg, P. (1999). Estimation of relative SD. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy, 25(1), 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broberg, P. (2016) SAGx: Statistical Analysis of the GeneChip. R package version 1.44.0: http://home.swipnet.se/pibroberg/expression_hemsida1.html. Retrieved from https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R

  • Doucet, S., Soussignan, R., Sagot, P., & Schaal, B. (2007), The “smellscape” of mother's breast: Effects of odor masking and selective unmasking on neonatal arousal, oral, and visual responses. Developmental Psychobiology, 49, 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doucet, S., Soussignan, R., Sagot, P., & Schaal, B. (2009). The secretion of areolar (Montgomery's) glands from lactating women elicits selective, unconditional responses in neonates. PLoS One, 4(10), e7579. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doucet, S., Soussignan, R., Sagot, P., & Schaal, B. (2012). An overlooked aspect of the human breast: Areolar glands in relation with breastfeeding pattern, neonatal weight gain, and the dynamics of lactation. Early Human Development, 88(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2011.07.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1930). The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, S. A., & Slatkin, M. (1992). Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 7(3), 92–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1987). Freudian slip. Natural History, 96, 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of san Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 205(1161), 581–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8(1), 23–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houle, D. (1992). Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics, 130(1), 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopans, D. (2007). Breast anatomy and basic histology, physiology, and pathology. In D. Kopans (Ed.), Breast Imaging (3rd ed., pp. 7–43). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessard, S. (1997). Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection revisited. Theoretical Population Biology, 52(2), 119–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, E. A. (2005). The case of the female orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukaski, H. C., Johnson, P. E., Bolonchuk, W. W., & Lykken, G. I. (1985). Assessment of fat-free mass using bioelectrical impendance measurements of the human body. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 41, 810–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, V. J. (2008). Clitoral and penile size variability are not significantly different: Lack of evidence for the byproduct theory of the female orgasm. Evolution and Development, 10(4), 396–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-007-9103-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, W. F. (1837). An exposition of the signs and symptoms of pregnancy, the period of human gestation, and the signs of delivery. London: Sherwood, Gilbert and Piper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, B. T., Harvey, J. A., & Cohen, M. A. (2009). Nipple-areolar complex: Normal anatomy and benign and malignant processes. RadioGraphics, 29, 509–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okasha, S. (2008). Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection—A philosophical analysis. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 59(3), 319–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pateyjohns, I. R., Brinkworth, G. D., Buckley, J. D., Noakes, M., & Clifton, P. M. (2006). Comparison of three bioelectrical impedance methods with DXA in overweight and obese men. Obesity, 14(11), 2064–2070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1896). Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution: III. Regression, heredity, and panmixia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 187, 253–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, O. M., & Miller, A. M. (1926). Sebaceous glands in the human nipple. American Journal of Obstetrics, 11, 789–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomiankowski, A., & Moller, A. P. (1995). A resolution of the lek paradox. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 260(1357), 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, R. H., & Winberg, J. (1999). Unique salience of maternal breast odors for newborn infants. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 23, 439–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, G. R. (1972). Fisher's ‘fundamental theorem’ made clear. Annals of Human Genetics, 36(2), 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A., Dawood, K., & Welling, L. L. M. (2012a). Why women have orgasms: An evolutionary analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1127–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L. M., Burriss, R. P., & Dawood, K. (2012b). Men's masculinity and attractiveness predict their female partners' reported orgasm frequency and timing. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.03.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, P. P. (2001). Rosen's breast pathology (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, K., van Loan, M., Fitzgerald, P. I., Hodgdon, J., & Van Itallie, T. (1988). Lean body mass estimation by bioelectrical impedance analysis: A four-site cross-validation study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 47, 7–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. M., Peters, T. G., & Donegan, W. L. (1982). Montgomery’s areolar tubercle. A light microscopic study. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 106, 60–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallen, K., & Lloyd, E. A. (2008). Clitoral variability compared with penile variability supports nonadaptation of female orgasm. Evolution and Development, 10(1), 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanardo, V., & Straface, G. (2015). The higher temperature in the areola supports the natural progression of the birth to breastfeeding continuum. PLoS One, 10(3), e0118774. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brendan P. Zietsch.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(CSV 8 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kelly, A.J., Dubbs, S.L., Barlow, F.K. et al. Male and Female Nipples as a Test Case for the Assumption that Functional Features Vary Less than Nonfunctional Byproducts. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology 4, 344–353 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-018-0096-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40750-018-0096-1

Keywords

Navigation