Differential patterns of apoptosis in response to aging in <i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several lines of evidence suggest that programmed cell death may play a role in the aging process and the age-related functional declines of multicellular organisms. To pave the way for the use of Drosophila to rigorously test this hypothesis in a genetic model organism, this work examines the pattern of apoptosis in the adult fly during aging. The analysis across the lifespan of caspase activity and DNA fragmentation shows that apoptosis occurs in adult flies at all ages and that it is linked to physiological age. The results establish that under normal conditions, fly aging is coupled with a lifelong gradual increase of apoptosis within muscle cells and an activation of apoptosis in fat cells of old flies. The nervous system does not show signs of apoptosis. These time- and tissue-specific changes indicate that aging influences the levels and the nature of the cells that commit to apoptosis. The comparison with the apoptotic response to starvation and oxidative stresses strongly suggests that the lifelong increase in flight and leg muscles results from the accumulation of oxidative damage associated with aging. This finding presents an attractive mechanism to account for the decline of locomotor functions and muscle loss in the elderly and opens the way for the genetic analysis of sarcopenia in Drosophila.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
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.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".