MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999508025 · doi:10.1101/2020.01.08.899740

Damage Repair Versus Aging in Biofilms

2020· preprint· en· W2999508025 on OpenAlexaff
Robyn Wright, Robert J. Clegg, Timothy Coker, Jan‐Ulrich Kreft

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiocrusts and Microbial Ecology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of Warwick
KeywordsMulticellular organismBiologySomaSenescenceCell biologyCell divisionDNA damageGermlinePopulationEvolutionary biologyGeneticsCellNeuroscienceGeneDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The extent of senescence due to damage accumulation (or aging) is evidently evolvable as it varies hugely between species and is not universal, suggesting that its fitness advantages depend on life history and environment. In contrast, repair of damage is present in all organisms studied. Repair and segregation of damage have not always been considered as alternatives, despite the fundamental trade-off between investing resources into repair or growth. For unicellular organisms, unrepaired damage could be divided asymmetrically between daughter cells, leading to aging of one and rejuvenation of the other. Repair of unicells has been shown to be advantageous in well-mixed environments such as chemostats. However, most microorganisms live in spatially structured systems such as biofilms with gradients of environmental conditions and cellular physiology as well as clonal population structure. We asked whether this clonal structure might favor aging by damage segregation as this can be seen as a division of labor strategy, akin to the germline soma division in multicellular organisms. We used an individual-based model with a newly developed adaptive repair strategy where cells respond to their current intracellular damage levels by investing into repair machinery accordingly. We found that the new adaptive repair strategy was advantageous whenever efficient and optimal, both in biofilms and chemostats. Thus, biofilms do not favor a germline soma-like division of labor between daughter cells in terms of damage segregation. We suggest that damage segregation is only beneficial when active and effective, extrinsic mortality is high and a degree of multicellularity is present. IMPORTANCE Damage is an inevitable consequence of life, leading to a trade-off between allocating resources into damage repair or into growth whilst allowing aging, i.e. , segregation of damage upon cell division. Few studies considered repair as an alternative to aging. Moreover, all previous studies merely considered well-mixed environments, although the vast majority of unicellular organisms live in spatially structured environments, exemplified by biofilms, and fitness advantages in well-mixed systems often turn into disadvantages in spatially structured systems. We compared the fitness consequences of aging versus damage repair in biofilms with an individual-based model implementing an adaptive repair mechanism based on sensing damage. We found that aging is not beneficial. Instead, it is useful as a stress response to deal with damage that failed to be repaired when (i) clearly asymmetric cell division is feasible; (ii) extrinsic mortality is high; and (iii) a degree of multicellularity is present.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicBiocrusts and Microbial EcologyFrench-language works237,207