Varsity athletes have lower 2D:4D ratios than other university students

Abstract

The second to fourth digit ratio (2D:4D) is a sexually dimorphic trait with lower finger ratios considered more masculine. These digit ratios are believed to reflect the prenatal hormonal environment with higher exposure to androgens in utero leading to more masculine digit ratios. The 2D:4D ratio has been negatively correlated with many factors, including aggression, physical fitness, and athleticism. We compared 2D:4D finger ratios of (1) male and female varsity athletes (n = 99) versus male and female student non-athletes (n = 122), and (2) males (n = 104) versus females (n = 117). Our results confirmed that both male (mean ± s(x) : 0.97 ± 0.004) and female (0.98 ± 0.005) varsity athletes had significantly lower ratios than their non-varsity peers (males: 0.99 ± 0.004; females: 1.00 ± 0.006), and that male athletes had significantly lower 2D:4D ratios than female athletes. Overall, males had significantly lower 2D:4D ratios than females (0.98 ± 0.003 vs. 0.99 ± 0.004). A smaller 2D:4D ratio appears to be consistent with participation in varsity sports among both males and females.

The Left Hand Second to Fourth Digit Ratio (2D:4D) Does Not Discriminate World-Class Female Gymnasts from Age Matched Sedentary Girls

“…[9] for gymnasts and with those on other measures of sporting abilities in women such as ergometer rowing performance [7], national or international fencing ranking with left 2D:4D [2], [11], and handgrip strength [23], [24]. However they are in contrast with studies in which significant relationships between 2D:4D and sporting ability in females were observed with the dominant hand 2D:4D [3], the left hand 2D:4D [21], or the right hand 2D:4D [2], [11], [22] although none of these studies contrasted world-class elite athletes with sedentary reference samples.…”

“…Overall, results of the studies are not consistent and in part difficult to compare because of the use of different procedures for measuring the digit lengths. In some studies where both sexes are included the relation is found in both men and women [3], [18], [22], although in the study of Hönekopp et al [18] the relation in women was significant only for the left hand 2D:4D and not for the right hand 2D:4D and vice versa in men. Other studies found a significant relation in men but not in women [7] and vice-versa [11].…”

“…A number of studies gave investigated the associations between 2D:4D and sporting ability or physical fitness [1]–[3], [5], [7], [9], [11], [17]–[24]. The hypotheses set up in these studies were that a lower digit ratio is related to better sport abilities or better motor performance, in both males and females.…”

The 2D:4D ratio, a proxy for prenatal androgen levels, differs in men with and without MS

“…The association between 2D:4D ratio and a variety of adult phenotypes has been explored. The most robust have included a lower 2D:4D ratio associated with athletic ability [25][26][27] and with autism spectrum disorders. 28,29 Regarding neurologic diseases, in men a higher 2D:4D ratio has been linked with higher risk of Alzheimer disease, while a lower 2D:4D ratio was associated with risk in women.…”

The Relationship Between Physical Fitness Levels and Digit Ratio (2D:4D) of High School Students Engaged Actively in Sports

“…Athletes' right hand 2D:4D averages were found as 0.86 and left hand 2D:4D averages were found as 0.93, while sedentary group's right hand 2D:4D averages were found as 0.92 and left hand 2D:4D averages were found as 0.92. In their study, Giffin et al, (2012), found the 2D:4D ratios of varsity athletes as 0.97, while 2D:4D ratios of non-varsity athletes was 0.99 and they reported that varsity athletes had significantly lower ratios than their non-varsity peers. Keshavarz et al, (2017), found that right hand 2D:4D average of elite Greco-Roman wrestlers was 0.93, while their left hand 2D:4D average was 0.93; right hand 2D:4D average of non-elite Greco-Roman wrestlers was 0,97, while their left hand 2D:4D average was 0,98 and right hand 2D:4D average of control group was 0,98, while their left hand 2D:4D average was 0,99.…”