Senescence in duckweed: age‐related declines in survival, reproduction and offspring quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary As they grow old, most organisms experience progressive physiological deterioration resulting in declining rates of survival and reproduction – a seemingly maladaptive phenomenon known as senescence. Although senescence is usually defined with respect only to survival and reproduction, a third component of fitness, offspring quality, may also decline with age. Few studies, however, have assessed age‐related changes in offspring quality using measures that truly reflect fitness. In a controlled environment, we tested for age‐related declines in three demographic components of fitness (survival, reproduction and offspring quality) in Lemna minor , a small aquatic plant in the subfamily Lemnoideae (the duckweeds) with a short life span and rapid rate of asexual reproduction. Our primary measure of offspring quality, the intrinsic rate of increase, more closely approximates fitness than measures used in previous studies such as size, life span and total reproductive output. We observed strong age‐related declines in all three components of fitness: old plants had lower rates of survival and reproduction, and produced lower‐quality offspring than younger plants. Theoretical and empirical research on the evolutionary biology of senescence should devote more attention to offspring quality. This often unrecognized component of fitness may change with age – as we have shown in L. minor – and may be shaped by, and feed back into, the same evolutionary forces that give rise to senescence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".