[dredmorbius]

There are numerous examples of families in which talents seem to persist across two or more generations. The Bachs and Mozarts come immediately to mind. Myrna Gopnik and her children Adam, Sarah, and Blake. The Huxleys. The Darwins. Multiple acting and performing dynasties: the Barrymores, Ravi Shankar and daughter Norah Jones, Woody and Arlo Guthrie. The Assads: brothers Sergio and Odair, sister Badi.

That's just off the top of my head, though searching for intergenerational or family genius turns up surprisingly few useful results.

Of course, disambiguating nurture vs. nature effects is a challenge, and I'd be interested in examples where neither prior fame nor economic advantage were particularly beneficial. Cases of twins or siblings raised independently would also be of interest.

[narag]

It's easier to understand if it's thought in a negative way. For "genius" you need the confluence of maybe a dozen genes. The moment one of them is not present, you don't get the whole potential. A genius' child could be very talented, but not quite the same as parent. There is also the "nurture" component, but people tend to underestimate or even discard genetics because it isn't just a single gene.

[dredmorbius]

I understand that. The point remains that there are areas in which some level of innate talent does in fact seem to track family lineages.