对50万人的研究未能发现特定的“同性恋基因”

After comparing differences in the DNA of just under half a million people, an international team of scientists has concluded it's impossible to predict a person's sexual preference based on their genes.

在比较了将近50万人的DNA差异后，一个国际科学家小组得出结论，根据一个人的基因来预测他的性偏好是不可能的。

That doesn't mean our unique combinations of genetic codes aren't involved in the development of our sexuality. But if you were hoping for a simple explanation for why many of us are attracted to members of the same sex, it's time to move on.

这并不意味着我们独特的基因密码组合与我们性行为的发展无关。但是，如果你想简单解释为什么我们中的许多人会被同性所吸引，那么是时候往下看了。
For decades, biologists have hunted for some kind of 'gay gene' signature that might help better explain our innate sexual predilections.

几十年来，生物学家一直在寻找某种“同性恋基因”的特征，这可能有助于更好地解释我们天生的性偏好。

While we've abandoned the idea that a single gene might be solely responsible for our passions, studies on families and twins have provided tantalising signs that our DNA might at least lay out the groundwork for our attractions.

虽然我们已经放弃了单一基因可能对我们的激情负全责的想法，但对家庭和双胞胎的研究已经提供了诱人的迹象，表明我们的DNA至少可以为我们的吸引力奠定基础。

Unfortunately many of those studies have been based on unconvincing sample sizes, or haven't met current standards of genome-wide studies to be significant.

不幸的是，这些研究中的许多都是基于难以信服的样本量，或者还没有达到当前基因组研究的重要标准。

So researchers pooled data on 477,522 records from the UK Biobank and the genetic reporting service 23andMe to identify sequences common to people who could be classed as either heterosexual or non-heterosexual.

因此，研究人员汇集了来自英国生物银行和基因报告服务机构23andme的477522份记录的数据，以确定那些可以被归类为异性恋或非异性恋的人所共有的序列。

The team based their results on a measure of whether or not an individual had ever had sex with a person of the same sex, which in the case of the UK Biobank was 4.1 percent of males and 2.8 percent of females.

该研究小组的研究结果是基于一个人是否曾与同性发生过性关系的衡量标准得出的。在英国生物银行的调查中，有4.1%的男性和2.8%的女性曾与同性发生过性关系。 Our sexual preferences don't always fall neatly into boxes, of course. That said, given the constraints of these kinds of surveys, it's not unreasonable to treat human sexuality as more categorical than a smooth continuum, at least for statistical purposes.

当然，我们的性取向并不总是一成不变的。也就是说，考虑到这类调查的局限性，将人类的性行为视为一个更明确的分类，而不是一个平滑的连续体，至少在统计目的上是合理的。

An analysis of whole genomes between these two groups revealed five locations on our chromosomes that are significantly associated with same-sex sexual behaviours. Thousands of other sequences were also implicated to a lesser extent.

对这两组之间的整个基因组的分析显示，我们染色体上的五个位置与同性性行为显著相关。数千个其他序列也在较小程度上受到牵连。

Some of those flagged genes have already been linked with biological functions such as hormonal pathways or ovulation, making it all too tempting to treat those variations as the kinds of genes that predispose us to a specific sexuality.

其中一些标记的基因，已经与诸如激素途径或排卵等生物学功能联系在一起，这使得人们很容易把这些变异，视为使我们倾向于某种特定性别的基因。

But we do need to put it all into context: On closer inspection, aggregates of such sequences accounted for just 8 to 25 percent of the contrast in sexuality. More importantly, combinations of these genes couldn't be used to predict any individual's sexual behaviour.

但我们确实需要把这一切都放在背景中:仔细观察一下，这些序列的总和只占性别对比的8%到25%。更重要的是，这些基因的组合不能用来预测任何个体的性行为。

That doesn't mean such genes can't play a role in our biology. In fact, it's hoped that identifying these sequences might help inform future research into social behaviours.

这并不意味着这些基因不能在我们的生物学中发挥作用。事实上，人们希望识别这些序列，可能有助于将来对社会行为的研究。


What it does mean is we're a long way off being able to pin down the odds of your sexuality based on combinations of genes you happen to possess. In what should come as little surprise by now, sexuality is a hugely complex behaviour that emerges from the interplay of different genes

它的真正含义是，我们离能够根据你碰巧拥有的基因组合，来确定你性取向的几率，还有很长的一段路要走。到目前为止，性是一种非常复杂的行为，它是由不同的基因相互作用而产生的。

Based on the researcher's findings, these specific clusters also happen to differ between the sexes. While many shared conditions and behaviours have a relatively high amount of overlap in the associated genes between men and women, there's relatively little similarity when it comes to the genetic architecture of sexuality.

根据研究者的发现，这些特定的群体在性别上也有差异。虽然许多共同的条件和行为，在男女之间的相关基因上有相对较高的重叠，但在性的遗传结构上，却没有相对的相似性。

The team also compared the sequences associated with sexuality with 28 other traits previously linked with non-heterosexual activity, including mental health conditions such as anxiety and more physical characteristics, such as height and birth weight.

研究小组还将与性有关的序列，与28个以前与非异性恋活动有关的其他特征进行了比较，其中包括焦虑等心理健康状况，以及身高和出生体重等更多的身体特征。

None of the physical characteristics stood out, but a handful of mental health and personality traits – such as anxiety, and loneliness – showed a small but significant genetic correlation.

这些生理特征都不突出，但一些心理健康和个性特征——如焦虑和孤独——显示出微小但显著的遗传相关性。
The researchers are quick to point out that culture might have a lot to answer for when it comes to challenges to mental health.

研究人员很快指出，当涉及到对心理健康的挑战时，文化可能有很多需要回答的问题。

"We emphasise that the causal processes underlying these genetic correlations are unclear and could be generated by environmental factors relating to prejudice against individuals engaging in same-sex sexual behaviour, among other possibilities," the team writes.

研究小组写道:“我们强调，这些基因关联背后的因果过程尚不清楚，可能是由环境因素造成的，环境因素与对从事同性性行为的个体的偏见有关，还有其他可能性。”

This very prejudice has also plagued the history of searching for links between the hard wiring of our biology and our sexuality, framing sexual and gender diversity as a disease to be cured or shunned.

这种偏见也一直困扰着在我们的生物学和性之间寻找联系的历史，将性和性别多样性定义为一种需要治愈或避免的疾病。

Times are changing, and so is the science.

时代在变化，科学也在变。

Sorting the rainbow of genes that plays a role in our sexual interests is no longer about trying to find simple explanations for 'aberrant' behaviours, but rather better understanding how the evolution of such a complex array of sexualities makes us all so very human.

对在我们性兴趣中起作用的基因彩虹进行分类，不再是试图寻找“异常”行为的简单解释，而是更好地理解如此复杂的一系列性现象的进化，是如何让我们变得如此人性化。

"We wish to make it clear that our results overwhelmingly point toward the richness and diversity of human sexuality," the researchers write.

研究人员写道：“我们希望清楚地表明，我们的研究结果，绝大多数地指向了人类性行为的丰富性和多样性。”

This research was published in Science.

这项研究发表在《科学》杂志上。