The full paper is available at the site.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/10/16/1302751110
Number sense in infancy predicts mathematical abilities in childhood
Ariel Starra, Melissa E. Libertusc, and Elizabeth M. Brannon
PNAS, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Significance
The uniquely human mathematical mind sets us apart from all other animals. How does this powerful capacity emerge over development? It is uncontroversial that education and environment shape mathematical ability, yet an untested assumption is that number sense in infants is a conceptual precursor that seeds human mathematical development. Our results provide the first support for this hypothesis. We found that preverbal number sense in 6-month-old infants predicted standardized math scores in the same children 3 years later. This discovery shows that number sense in infancy is a building block for later mathematical ability and invites educational interventions to improve number sense even before children learn to count.

ETA: discussed at Duke Today, October 22, 2013
http://today.duke.edu/2013/10/babymath
Baby's Innate Number Sense Predicts Future Math Skill:
Innate ability to identify quantities previews future mathematics performance

Maybe I'm being facile, but aren't they just saying "children who intuitively understand numbers at an early age will subsequently be found to understand numbers"? Um...yeah. Innate characteristics tend to be serially correlated. No surprise there.

It seems a bit of a waste of grant money to "discover" that. (Snark directed at researchers, not Bostonian.)

Wait? What? I thought they were all supposed to even out in grade 3.

Right. This is news in the edumacation industry where nurture allegedly wallops nature every time and unicorns distribute differentiated assignments to students. Gotcha!

To be fair, most schools do differentiate quite effectively, because each student in a given grade level gets the same worksheet on a different sheet of paper.

ROFL. {like}

+1

And a bag of unicorn treats.

As always, thank you for posting. I personally believe this issue is important at this time, as much of gifted education is not looking at serving those with unique academic and educational placement and pacing needs due to innate ability, but rather looking to serve those with high achievement.

What is the difference, some may ask?
1) A temporary boost in achievement may result in issues of identification, and pupils who even out (link to another's post on a recent thread- http://giftedissues.davidsongifted....How_to_Hothouse_Your_Kid.html#Post173231)
2) Among students with innate ability, schools may manage achievement downward, through lack of meaningful challenge, support, or encouragement
3) Innately gifted individuals who do not receive a challenge worthy of their potential may be at risk for developing maladaptive behaviors including underachievement and perfectionism
4) Innately gifted individuals may be isolated without intellectual peers

Parents may wish to be mindful of all research which indicates the existence of innate giftedness.

Ah yes. But apparently they are working on ways to train the non mathy babies to become mathy.