Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Human genealogy reveals a selective advantage to moderate fecundity

An Author Correction to this article was published on 08 May 2019

This article has been updated


Life-history theory suggests that the level of fecundity of each organism reflects the effect of the trade-off between the quantity and quality of offspring on its long-run reproductive success. The present research provides evidence that moderate fecundity was conducive to long-run reproductive success in humans. Using a reconstructed genealogy for nearly half a million individuals in Quebec during the 1608–1800 period, the study establishes that, while high fecundity was associated with a larger number of children, perhaps paradoxically, moderate fecundity maximized the number of descendants after several generations. Moreover, the analysis further suggests that evolutionary forces decreased the level of fecundity in the population over this period, consistent with an additional finding that the level of fecundity that maximized long-run reproductive success was below the population mean. The research identifies several mechanisms that contributed to the importance of moderate fecundity for long-run reproductive success. It suggests that, while individuals with lower fecundity had fewer children, the observed hump-shaped effect of fecundity on long-run reproductive success reflects the beneficial effects of lower fecundity on various measures of child quality, such as marriageability and literacy, and thus on the reproductive success of each child.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Time between marriage and first birth.
Fig. 2: Overview of the proposed hypothesis.
Fig. 3: Predicted numbers of children and great-great-grandchildren.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from PRDH at the University of Montreal. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license. They are available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of PRDH.

Code availability

The statistical code is available from the authors upon request.

Change history

  • 10 April 2019

    The original Nature Research Reporting Summary provided with this manuscript was incorrect. The correct version is now available online.

  • 08 May 2019

    In the version of this article initially published, several sentences contained errors. The sentence “Moreover, the analysis further suggests that evolutionary forces decreased the level of fecundity in the population over this period, consistent with an additional finding that the level of fecundity that maximized long-run reproductive success was above the population mean” contained an error. The word “above” should have been “below”. Also, the sentence “Interestingly, the PI associated with the peak of the hump is above the mean and median PI in the population (Supplementary Table 3), in accordance with the finding that evolutionary forces decreased the mean PI in the population over the time period” contained an error. The word “decreased” should have been “increased”. Finally, the sentence “Hence, consistent with the finding that the level of fecundity that maximized long-run reproductive success was above the population mean (that is, 62 weeks), as well as the population median (that is, 53 weeks), evolutionary forces operated towards an increase in the mean PI over these 4 generations from 62.4 to 66.2 weeks” contained an error. The word “fecundity” should have instead been “PI”. The errors have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.


  1. 1.

    Lack, D. et al. The Natural Regulation of Animal Numbers (Clarenden Press, 1954).

  2. 2.

    Cody, M. L. A general theory of clutch size. Evolution 20, 174–184 (1966).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Roff, D. A. Evolution of Life Histories: Theory and Analysis (Chapman & Hall, 1992).

  4. 4.

    Stearns, S. C. The Evolution of Life Histories (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992).

  5. 5.

    Salisbury, E. J. et al. The Reproductive Capacity of Plants. Studies in Quantitative Biology (G. Bell & Sons, Ltd. 1942).

  6. 6.

    Harper, J. L., Lovell, P. H. & Moore, K. G. The shapes and sizes of seeds. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1, 327–356 (1970).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Roff, D. A. Life History Evolution (Sinauer Associates, 2002).

  8. 8.

    Charnov, E. L. & Ernest, S. K. M. The offspring-size/clutch-size trade-off in mammals. Am. Nat. 167, 578–582 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Walker, R. M., Gurven, M., Burger, O. & Hamilton, M. J. The trade-off between number and size of offspring in humans and other primates. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 827–833 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Lee, R. D. in Handbook of Population and Family Economics Vol. 1 (eds Rosenzweig, M. R. & Stark, O.) 1063–1115 (Elsevier, 1993).

  11. 11.

    Hill, K. & Hurtado, A. M. Ache Life History: The Ecology and Demography of a Foraging People (Aldine de Gruyter, 1996).

  12. 12.

    Strassmann, B. I. & Gillespie, B. Life-history theory, fertility and reproductive success in humans. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 553–562 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Gillespie, D. O. S., Russell, A. F. & Lummaa, V. When fecundity does not equal fitness: evidence of an offspring quantity versus quality trade-off in pre-industrial humans. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 713–722 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Meij, J. J. et al. Quality–quantity trade-off of human offspring under adverse environmental conditions. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 1014–1023 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Kaplan, H. S., Lancaster, J. B., Johnson, S. E. & Bock, J. A. Does observed fertility maximize fitness among New Mexican men? Hum. Nat. 6, 325–360 (1995).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Borgerhoff Mulder, M. Optimizing offspring: the quantity–quality tradeoff in agropastoral Kipsigis. Evol. Hum. Behav. 21, 391–410 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Lawson, D. W. & Mulder, M. B. The offspring quantity–quality trade-off and human fertility variation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 371, 20150145 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Christensen, K. et al. The correlation of fecundability among twins: evidence of a genetic effect on fertility? Epidemiology 14, 60–64 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Pettay, J. E., Kruuk, L. E. B., Jokela, J. & Lummaa, V. Heritability and genetic constraints of life-history trait evolution in preindustrial humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 2838–2843 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Ramlau-Hansen, C. H., Thulstrup, A. M., Olsen, J. & Bonde, J. P. Parental subfecundity and risk of decreased semen quality in the male offspring: a follow-up study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 167, 1458–1464 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kosova, G., Abney, M. & Ober, C. Heritability of reproductive fitness traits in a human population. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 1772–1778 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Lind, J. T. & Mehlum, H. With or without U? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 72, 109–118 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Price, G. R. Selection and covariance. Nature 227, 520–521 (1970).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Frank, S. A. Natural selection. IV. The price equation. J. Evol. Biol. 2, 1002–1019 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Klemp, M. & Weisdorf, J. Fecundity, fertility and the formation of human capital. Econ. J. 129, 925–960 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Galor, O. & Moav, O. Natural selection and the origin of economic growth. Q. J. Econ. 117, 1133–1191 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Galor, O. Unified Growth Theory (Princeton Univ. Press, 2011).

  28. 28.

    Légaré, J. A population register for Canada under the French regime: context, scope, content and applications. Can. Stud. Popul. 15, 1–16 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Lacroix, C. & Desjardins, B. Adult mortality in preindustrial Quebec. Can. Stud. Popul. 39, 23–33 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Milot, E. et al. Evidence for evolution in response to natural selection in a contemporary human population. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 17040–17045 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The data were collected and kindly provided by ‘Le Programme de Recherche en Démographie Historique’ (PRDH) at the University of Montreal. The authors are grateful to B. Desjardins for sharing the data and providing helpful information. Part of this research was conducted while M.K. was a visiting assistant professor at Brown University and a visiting scholar at Harvard University, and funded by the Carlsberg Foundation, the Danish Research Council (reference numbers 1329–00093 and 1327–00245) and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement number 753615).

Author information




O.G. and M.K. conceived the research idea, formulated the theory, analysed the data and wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Oded Galor or Marc Klemp.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

These authors contributed equally: Oded Galor, Marc Klemp.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Sections 1–13 and Supplementary Bibliography

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galor, O., Klemp, M. Human genealogy reveals a selective advantage to moderate fecundity. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 853–857 (2019).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing