MétaCan
Menu
← all works

On the evolutionary origin of aging

2007· article· en· 234 citations· W2102585177 on OpenAlex· 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2007.00281.x

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

Candidate categories
none
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Bench or experimentalConsensus signal: Bench or experimental
Genre
Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score
0.015
Threshold uncertainty score
0.360
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread
0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

It is generally believed that the first organisms did not age, and that aging thus evolved at some point in the history of life. When and why this transition occurred is a fundamental question in evolutionary biology. Recent reports of aging in bacteria suggest that aging predates the emergence of eukaryotes and originated in simple unicellular organisms. Here we use simple models to study why such organisms would evolve aging. These models show that the differentiation between an aging parent and a rejuvenated offspring readily evolves as a strategy to cope with damage that accumulates due to vital activities. We use measurements of the age-specific performance of individual bacteria to test the assumptions of the model, and find evidence that they are fulfilled. The mechanism that leads to aging is expected to operate in a wide range of organisms, suggesting that aging evolved early and repeatedly in the history of life. Aging might thus be a more fundamental aspect of cellular organisms than assumed so far.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Aging Cell
Topic
Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Field
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Canadian institutions
University of British Columbia
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Keywords
BiologyOrganismEvolutionary biologyModel organismLongevityLife historyCellular AgingMechanism (biology)AgeingGenetic FitnessOffspringExperimental evolutionBiological evolutionEcologyGeneticsGeneEpistemology
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes