The Hayflick Limit May Determine the Effective Clonal Diversity of Naive T Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having a large number of sufficiently abundant T cell clones is important for adequate protection against diseases. However, as shown in this paper and elsewhere, between young adulthood and >70 y of age the effective clonal diversity of naive CD4/CD8 T cells found in human blood declines by a factor of >10. (Effective clonal diversity accounts for both the number and the abundance of T cell clones.) The causes of this observation are incompletely understood. A previous study proposed that it might result from the emergence of certain rare, replication-enhancing mutations in T cells. In this paper, we propose an even simpler explanation: that it results from the loss of T cells that have attained replicative senescence (i.e., the Hayflick limit). Stochastic numerical simulations of naive T cell population dynamics, based on experimental parameters, show that the rate of homeostatic T cell proliferation increases after the age of ∼60 y because naive T cells collectively approach replicative senescence. This leads to a sharp decline of effective clonal diversity after ∼70 y, in agreement with empirical data. A mathematical analysis predicts that, without an increase in the naive T cell proliferation rate, this decline will occur >50 yr later than empirically observed. These results are consistent with a model in which exhaustion of the proliferative capacity of naive T cells causes a sharp decline of their effective clonal diversity and imply that therapeutic potentiation of thymopoiesis might either prevent or reverse this outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".