Sports Medicine

, Volume 37, Issue 11, pp 961–980 | Cite as

Genes, Environment and Sport Performance

Why the Nature-Nurture Dualism is no Longer Relevant
  • Keith Davids
  • Joseph Baker
Review Article Genes, Environment and Sport Performance


The historical debate on the relative influences of genes (i.e. nature) and environment (i.e. nurture) on human behaviour has been characterised by extreme positions leading to reductionist and polemic conclusions. Our analysis of research on sport and exercise behaviours shows that currently there is little support for either biologically or environmentally deterministic perspectives on elite athletic performance. In sports medicine, recent molecular biological advances in genomic studies have been over-interpreted, leading to a questionable ‘single-gene-as-magic-bullet’ philosophy adopted by some practitioners. Similarly, although extensive involvement in training and practice is needed at elite levels, it has become apparent that the acquisition of expertise is not merely about amassing a requisite number of practice hours. Although an interactionist perspective has been mooted over the years, a powerful explanatory framework has been lacking. In this article, we propose how the complementary nature of degenerate neurobiological systems might provide the theoretical basis for explaining the interactive influence of genetic and environmental constraints on elite athletic performance. We argue that, due to inherent human degeneracy, there are many different trajectories to achieving elite athletic performance. While the greatest training responses may be theoretically associated with the most favourable genotypes being exposed to highly specialised training environments, this is a rare and complex outcome. The concept of degeneracy provides us with a basis for understanding why each of the major interacting constraints might act in a compensatory manner on the acquisition of elite athletic performance.


Environmental Constraint Sport Performance Deliberate Practice Magic Bullet AMPD 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review. The authors wish to acknowledge the help of Pam Smith of the School of Human Movement Studies, Queensland University of Technology, in preparing this manuscript for publication.


  1. 1.
    Vitzthum VJ. A number no greater than the sum of its parts: the use and abuse of heritability. Hum Biol 2003; 75: 539–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Podewils LJ, Guallar E, Kuller LH, et al. Physical activity,APOE genotype, and dementia risk: findings from the Cardiovascular Health Cognition Study. Am J Epidemiol 2005; 161: 639–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schuit AJ, Feskens EJM, Launer LJ, et al. Physical activity and cognitive decline: the role of the apolipoprotein e4 allele. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 772–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wilson EO. Sociobiology: the new synthesis. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1975Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hellman H. Great feuds in science: ten of the liveliest disputes ever. New York: Wiley, 1998Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ceci S, Williams W. The nature-nurture debate: the essential readings. New York: Blackwell Publishing Co., 2000Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewontin RC. It ain’t necessarily so: the dream of the human genome and other illusions. London: Granta Books, 2000Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Geus EJC, Boomsma DI. A genetic neuroscience approach to human cognition. Eur Psychologist 2001; 6: 241–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bouchard Jr TJ, McGue M. Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences. J Neurobiol 2003; 54: 4–45Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kimble GA. Evolution of the nature-nurture issue in the history of psychology. In: Plomin R, McClearn GE, editors. Nature, nurture and psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1993: 3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Petrill SA, Lipton PA, Hewitt JK, et al. Genetic and environmental contributions to general cognitive ability through the first 16 years of life. Dev Psychol 2004; 40: 805–12PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baker J, Davids K. Genetic and environmental constraints on variability in sport performance. In: Davids K, Bennett SJ, Newell KM, editors. Variability in the movement system: a multidisciplinary perspective. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 2006: 129Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brutsaert TD, Parra EJ. What makes a champion? Explaining variation in human athletic performance. Resp Physiol Neurobiol 2006; 151: 109–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pitsiladis Y, Bale J, Sharp C, editors. East African running: towards a cross-disciplinary perspective. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2006Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miah A. Genetically modified athletes: biomedical ethics, gene doping and sport. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2004Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tamburrini C, Tansjö T, editors. Genetic technology and sport: ethical questions. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2005Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coghlan A. Elite athletes born to run. New Scientist 2003; 30: 4–5Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yang N, MacArthur DG, Gulbin JP, et al. ACTN3 genotype is associated with human elite athletic performance. Am J Hum Genetics 2003; 73: 627–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Coghlan A. How the right genes may get you off to a flying start. New Scientist 1998 May; 23: 4Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Anderson JL, Schjerling P, Saltin B, et al. Muscle, genes and athletic performance. Scientific Am 2000; 283: 31–7Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Friedmann T, Koss JO. Gene transfer and athletics: an impending problem. Mol Ther 2001; 3: 819–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCrory P. Super athletes or gene cheats. Br J Sports Med 2003; 37 (3): 192–3PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dennis C. Rugby team converts to give genes test a try. Nature 2005; 434:260Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stubbe JH, Boomsma DL, De Geus EJC. Sport participation during adolescence: a shift from environmental to genetic factors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005; 37: 563–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Unal M, Unal DO. Gene doping in sports. Sports Med 2004; 34: 357–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kelso JAS, Engström DA. The complementary nature. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2006Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Galton F. Inquiries into human faculty and its development. London: Macmillan, 1883Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Galton F. On men of science: their nature and their nurture. Nature 1874; 9: 344–5Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    James W. Principles of psychology. New York: Holt, 1890Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Terman L. Genetic studies of genius. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press, 1925Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Terman LM, Oden MH. The gifted child grows up. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press, 1947Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Terman LM, Oden MH. The gifted group at mid-life. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press, 1959Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Watson JB. Behaviorism. New York: Norton, 1924Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pinker S. The blank slate: the modern denial of human nature. New York: Viking, 2002Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Herrnstein RJ, Murray C. The bell curve: intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press, 1994Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Crossman ERFW. A theory of the acquisition of speed-skill. Ergonomics 1959; 2: 153–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kolers PA. Memorial consequences of automatized encoding. J Exper Psychol Hum Learn Memory 1975; 1: 689–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Newell A, Rosenbloom PS. Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In: Anderson JR, editor. Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum 1981: 1–55Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Heathcote A, Brown S, Mewhort DJK. The power law repealed: the case for an exponential law of practice. Psychonomic Bull Rev 2000; 7: 185–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Newell KM, Liu Y-T, Mayer-Kress G. Time scales in motor learning and development. Psychological Rev 2001; 108: 57–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Römer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev 1993; 100: 363–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ericsson KA, Chase WG, Faloon S. Acquisition of a memory skill. Science 1980; 208: 1181–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Simon HA, Chase WG. Skill in chess. Am Sci 1973; 61: 394–403Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ericsson KA. Development of elite performance and deliberate practice: an update from the perspective of the expert performance approach. In: Starkes JL, Ericsson KA, editors. Expert performance in sports: advances in research on sport expertise. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 2003: 49–83Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Starkes JL, Deakin JM, Allard F, et al. Deliberate practice in sports: what is it anyway? In: Ericsson KA, editor. The road to excellence: the acquisition of expert performance in the arts, sciences, sports and games. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum, 1996: 81–106Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Helsen WF, Starkes JL, Hodges NJ. Team sports and the theory of deliberate practice. J Sport Exerc Psychol 1998; 20: 12–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hodge T, Deakin J. Deliberate practice and expertise in the martial arts: the role of context in motor recall. J Sport Exerc Psychol 1998; 20: 260–79Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Baker J, Côteé J, Abernethy B. Learning from the experts: practice activities of expert decision-makers in sport. Res Q Exerc Sport 2003; 74: 342–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Deakin JM, Cobley S. An examination of the practice environments in figure skating and volleyball: a search for deliberate practice. In: Starkes JL, Ericsson KA, editors. Recent advances in the study of sport expertise. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 2003: 115–35Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Baker J. Early specialization in youth sport: a requirement for adult expertise? High Ability Stud 2003; 14: 85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wiersma LD. Risks and benefits of youth sport specialization: perspectives and recommendations. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2000; 12: 13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Baker J, Côteé J, Abernethy B. Sport specific training, deliberate practice and the development of expertise in team ball sports. J Appl Sport Psychol 2003; 15: 12–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Abernethy B, Baker J, Côté J. Transfer of pattern recall skills as a contributor to the development of sport expertise. Appl Cognitive Psychol 2005; 19: 705–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Flynn MG, Carroll KK, Hall HL, et al. Cross training: indices of training stress and performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998; 30: 294–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Millet GP, Candau RB, Barbier B, et al. Modelling the transfers of training effects on performance in elite triathletes. Int J Sports Med 2002; 23: 55–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mutton DL, Loy SF, Perry DM, et al. Effect of run vs combined cycle-run training on aerobic capacity and running performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993; 25: 1393–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Côteé J, Baker J, Abernethy B. From play to practice: a developmental framework for the acquisition of expertise in team sports. In: Starkes J, Ericsson KA, editors. Expert performance in sports: advances in research on sport expertise. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 2003: 89–110Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Petlichkoff LM. Coaching children: understanding the motivational process. Sport Sci Rev 1993; 2: 49–61Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Abernethy B, Farrow D, Berry J. Constraints and issues in the development of a general theory of expert perceptual-motor performance. In: Starkes JL, Ericsson KA, editors. Expert performance in sports: advances in research on sport expertise. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 2003: 349–69Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sternberg RJ. Costs of expertise. In: Ericsson KA, editor. The road to excellence: the acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1996: 347–53Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Baker J, Horton S. A review of primary and secondary influences on sport expertise. High Ability Stud 2004; 15: 211–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Voss J, Green T, Penner B. Problem-solving in social sciences. In: Bower G, editor. The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research theory. New York: Academic Press, 1983: 165–213Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Starkes JL. The road to expertise: is practice the only determinant? Int J Sport Psychol 2000; 31: 431–51Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bloom GA, Crumpton R, Anderson JE. A systematic observation study of the teaching behaviors of an expert basketball coach. Sport Psychologist 1999; 13: 157–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tharp RG, Gallimore R. What a coach can teach a teacher. Psychol Today 1976; 9: 74–8Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Bloom BS. Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Publishing Group, 1985Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Côteé J. The influence of the family in the development of talent in sports. Sport Psychologist 1999; 13: 395–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ehrlich PR. Human natures: genes, cultures, and the human prospect. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Russell S. Ice time: a Canadian hockey journey. Toronto (ON): Viking, 2000Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Robinson L. Crossing the line: violence and sexual assault in Canada’s national sport. Toronto: McCelland & Stewart Inc.,1998Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Musch J, Grondin S. Unequal competition as an impediment to personal development: a review of the relative age effect in sport. Dev Rev 2001; 21: 147–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Barnsley RH, Thompson AH. Gifted or learning disabled? The age of entering school may make the difference. Early Childhood Educ 1985; 18: 11–4Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hauck AL, Finch AJ. The effect of relative age on achievement in middle school. Psychol Schools 1993; 30: 74–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Barnsley RH, Thompson AH. Birthdate and success in minor hockey: the key to the NHL. Can J Behav Sci 1988; 20: 167–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Thompson AH, Barnsley RH, Steblelsky G. ‘Born to play ball’:the relative age effect and major league baseball. Sociol Sport J 1991; 8: 146–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Barnsley RH, Thompson AH, Legault P. Family planning: football style. The relative age effect in football. Int Rev Sociol Sport 1992; 27: 77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Carlson RC. The socialization of elite tennis players in Sweden: an analysis of the players’ backgrounds and development. Sociol Sport J 1988; 5: 241–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Curtis JE, Birch JS. Size of community of origin and recruitment to professional and olympic hockey in North America. Sociol Sport J 1987; 4: 229–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Côteé J, MacDonald D, Baker J, et al. When ‘where’ is more important than ‘when’: birthplace effects on the achievement of sporting expertise. J Sports Sci 2006; 24: 1065–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Elgar FJ, Arlett C, Groves R. Stress, coping, and behavioural problems among rural and urban adolescents. J Adolesc 2003; 26: 574–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kytta M. Affordances of children’s environments in the context of cities, small towns, suburbs, and rural villages in Finland and Belarus. J Environ Psychol 2002; 22: 109–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Plomin R, DeFries JC, McClearn GE, Behavioural genetics. 4th ed. New York: Freeman, 2001Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Bouchard Jr TJ, Lykken DT, McGue M, et al. Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. Science 1990; 250: 223–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Bouchard Jr TJ. IQ similarity in twins reared apart: findings and response to critics. In Sternberg RJ, Grigorenko E, editors. Intelligence, heredity, and environment. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press, 1997: 126–60Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    DiLalla DL, Carey G, Gottesman II, et al. Heritability of MMPI personality indicators of psychopathology in twins reared apart. J Abnormal Psychol 1996; 105: 491–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Tellegen A, Lykken DT, Bouchard Jr TJ, et al. Personality similarities in twins reared apart and together. J Personality Social Psychol 1988; 54: 1031–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Keller LM, Bouchard Jr TJ, Arvey RD, et al. Work values: genetic and environmental influences. J Appl Psychol 1992; 77: 79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Arvey RD, Bouchard Jr TJ, Segal NL, et al. Job satisfaction: environmental and genetic components. J Appl Psychol 1989; 74: 187–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Johnson W, Bouchard Jr TJ, Segal NL, et al. The Stroop Color Word Test: genetic and environmental influences: reading,mental ability, and personality correlates. J Educ Psychol 2003; 95: 58–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Plomin R, Colledge E. Genetics and psychology: beyond heritability. Eur Psychologist 2001; 6: 229–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Schlaug G, Jancke L, Huang Y, et al. In vivo evidence of structural brain asymmetry in musicians. Science 1995; 267: 699–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Sacks O. Musical ability [letter]. Science 1995; 268: 621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Baharloo S, Service SK, Risch N, et al. Familial aggregation of absolute pitch. Am J Hum Genet; 2000; 67: 755–8PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Gregerson PK, Kowalsky E, Kohn N, et al. Absolute pitch: prevalence, ethnic variation, and estimation of the genetic component. Am J Hum Genet 1999; 65: 911–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Slonimsky N. Perfect pitch. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Williams L, Gross JB. Heritability of motor skill. Acta Genet Med 1980; 29: 127–36Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Fox PW, Hershberger SL, Bouchard TJ, et al. Genetic and environmental contributions to the acquisition of a motor skill. Nature 1996; 384: 356–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Missitzi J, Geladas N, Klissouras V. Heritability in neuromuscular coordination: implications for motor control strategies. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004; 36: 233–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Joseph J. Separated twins and the genetics of personality differences: a critique. Am J Psychol 2001; 114: 1–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Davids K, Glazier P, Araùjo D, et al. Movement systems as dynamical systems: the role of functional variability and its implications for sports medicine. Sports Med 2003; 33: 245–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Kevles DJ, Hood L. The code of codes: scientific and social issues in the human genome project. Boston (MA): Harvard University Press, 1992Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Hopkins WG. Genes and training for athletic performance [online]. Available from URL: ( [Accessed 2005 Sep 17]
  103. 103.
    Rankinen T, Bray MS, Hagberg JM, et al. The human gene map for performance and health-related fitness phenotypes: the 2005 update. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005; 38: 1863–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Jones A, Montgomery HE, Woods DR. Human performance: a role for the ACE genotype? Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2002; 30: 184–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Kostek MC, Delmonico MJ, Reichel JB, et al. Muscle strength response to strength training is influenced by insulin-like growth factor 1 genotype in older adults. J Appl Physiol 2005; 98: 2147–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Niemi AK, Majaama K. Mitochondrial DNA and ACTN3 genotypes in Finnish elite endurance and sprint athletes. Eur J Hum Genet 2005; 13: 965–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Allen DL, Harrison BC, Sartorius C, et al. Mutation of the IIB myosin heavy chain gene results in muscle fibre loss and compensatory hypertrophy. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 2001; 280: C637–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Mitch WE, Price SR. Transcription factors and muscle cachexia: is there a therapeutic target? Lancet 2001; 357: 734–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Ivey FM, Roth SM, Ferrell RE, et al. Effects of age, gender, and mysostatin genotype on the hypertrophic response to heavy resistance strength training. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000; 55: 641–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Hortobàgyi T, Dempsey L, Fraser D, et al. Changes in muscle strength, muscle fibre size and myofibrillar gene expression after immobilization and retraining in humans. J Physiol 2000; 524: 293–304PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Calvo M, Rodas G, Vallejo M, et al. Heritability of explosive power and anaerobic capacity in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002; 86: 218–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Forbes GB, Sauer EP, Wetkamp LR. Lean body mass in twins. Metabolism 1995; 44: 1442–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Thibault M, Simoneau J, Côteé C, et al. Inheritance of human muscle enzyme adaptation to isokinetic strength training. Hum Heredity 1986; 36: 341–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Thomis MA, Bennen GP, Maes HH, et al. Strength training: importance of genetic factors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 30: 724–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Chagnon YC, Rice T, Perusse L, et al. Genomic scan for genes affecting body composition before and after training in Caucasians from HERITAGE. J Appl Physiol 2001; 90: 1777–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Naya FJ, Mercer B, Shelton J, et al. Stimulation of slow skeletal muscle fibre gene expression in calcineurin in vivo. J Biol Chem 2005; 275: 4545–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Swoap SJ, Bridge Hunter R, Stevenson EJ, et al. The calcineurin-NFAT pathway and muscle fibre-type gene expression. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 2000; 279: C915–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    McAinch AJ, Lee JS, Bruce CR, et al. Dietary regulation of fat oxidative gene expression in different skeletal muscle fiber types. Obesity Res 2003; 11: 1471–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Rubío JC, Martín MA, Rabadàn M, et al. Frequency of C34T mutation of the AMPD1 gene in world-class endurance athletes: does this mutation impair performance? J Appl Physiol 2005; 98: 2108–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Cam FS, Colakoglu M, Sekuri S, et al. Association between the ACE I/D gene polymorphism and physical performance in a homogenous non-elite cohort. Can J Appl Physiol 2005; 30: 74–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Scott RA, Moran C, Wilson RH, et al. No association between angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) gene variation and endurance athlete status in Kenyans. Comp Biochem Physiol 2005; 141 Pt A: 169–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Silva GJ, Moreira ED, Pereira AC, et al. ACE gene dosage modulates pressure-induced cardiac hypertrophy in mice and men. Physiol Genomics 2006; 27: 237–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Sayed-Tabatabuei FA, Oostra BA, Isaacs A, et al. ACE polymorphisms. Circ Res 2006; 98: 1123–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Feitosa MF, Gaskill SE, Rice T, et al. Major gene effects on exercise ventilatory threshold: the HERITAGE Family Study. J Appl Physiol 2002; 93: 1000–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Williams AG, Day SH, Folland JP, et al. Circulating angiotensin converting enzyme activity is correlated with muscle strength. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005; 37: 944–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Sonna LA, Sharp MA, Knapik JJ, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme genotype and physical performance during US Army basic training. J Appl Physiol 2001; 91: 1355–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Pescatello LS, Kostek MA, Gordish-Dessman H, et al. ACE ID genotype and the muscle strength and size response to unilateral resistance training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006; 38: 1074–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Montgomery HE, Marshall R, Hemingway H, et al. Human gene for physical performance. Nature 1998; 393: 221–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Gayagay G, Yu B, Hambly B, et al. Elite endurance athletes and the ACE I allele: the role of genes in athletic performance. Hum Genet 1998; 103: 48–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Myerson S, Hemingway H, Budget R, et al. Human angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene and endurance performance. J Appl Physiol 1999; 87: 1313–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Bouchard C, Daw EW, Rice T, et al. Familial resemblance for V? O2max in the sendentary state: the HERITAGE Family Study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998; 30: 252–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Baker J, Horton S. East African running dominance revisited: a role for stereotype threat? Br J Sports Med 2003; 37: 553–5PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Johnston TD, Edwards L. Genes, interactions and the development of behaviour. Psychol Rev 2002; 109: 26–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Kauffman S. Understanding genetic regulatory networks. Int J Astrobiol 2003; 2: 131–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Kaerns M, Elston TC, Blake W, et al. Stochasticity in gene expression: from theories to phenotypes. Nature Rev Genet 2005; 6: 451–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Gardner T, Collins JJ. Neutralizing noise in gene networks. Nature 2000; 405: 520–1PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Edelman GM, Gally JA. Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2001; 98: 13763–8PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Tononi G, Sporns O, Edelman GM. Measures of degeneracy and redundancy in biological networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1999; 96: 3257–62PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Yates FE. Self-organizing systems. In: Boyd C, Noble D, editors. Logic of life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993: 189–218Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    van Geert P. Dynamic systems of development: change between complexity and chaos. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1994Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Oyama S. The ontogeny of information: developmental systems and evolution. 2nd ed. Durham (NC): Duke University Press, 2000Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Dodge KA. The nature-nurture debate and public policy. Merrill-Palmer Q 2004; 50: 418–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Barsh GS, Farooqi IS, O’Rahilly S. Genetics of body-weight regulation. Nature 2000; 404: 644–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Le Gaillard J-F, Clobert J, Ferriáre R. Physical performance and Darwinian fitness in lizards. Nature 2004; 432: 502–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Gollub J, Solomon T. Chaos theory. In: Ranson KA, editor. Academic American encyclopedia. Danbury (CT): Grolier Incorporated, 1996Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Beunen G, Thomis M. Genetic determinants of sports participation and daily physical activity. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999; 23: Suppl. 3: S55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Carpenter S. Psychology is bound to become more Darwinian, says eminent primatologist [letter]. Monitor Psychol 2001; 32: 4Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Rosengren KS, Savelsbergh G, Van der Kamp J. Development and learning: a TASC-based perspective of the acquisition of perceptual-motor behaviours. Infant Behav Dev 2003; 26: 473–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Wahlsten D. Insensitivity of the analysis of variance to heredity environment interactions. Behav Brain Sci 1990; 13: 109–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Cronbach LJ. Emerging views on methodology. In: Wachs TD, Plomin R, editors. Conceptualization and measurement of organism-environment interaction. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1991Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith Davids
    • 1
  • Joseph Baker
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Human Movement StudiesQueensland University of TechnologyKelvin GroveAustralia
  2. 2.School of Kinesiology and Health ScienceYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations