Different Mechanisms of Longevity in Long-Lived Mouse and <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> Mutants Revealed by Statistical Analysis of Mortality Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mouse and Caenorhabditis elegans mutants with altered life spans are being used to investigate the aging process and how genes determine life span. The survival of a population can be modeled by the Gompertz function, which comprises two parameters. One of these parameters ("G") describes the rate at which mortality accelerates with age and is often described as the "rate of aging." The other parameter ("A") may correspond to the organism's baseline vulnerability to deleterious effects of disease and the environment. We show that, in mice, life-span-extending mutations systematically fail to affect the age-dependent acceleration of mortality (G), but instead affect only baseline vulnerability (A). This remains true even when comparing strains maintained under identical environmental conditions. In contrast, life-span-extending mutations in C. elegans were associated with decreases in G These observations on mortality rate kinetics suggest that the mechanisms of aging in mammals might fundamentally differ from those in nematodes.
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".