A synthesis of senescence predictions for indeterminate growth, and support from multiple tests in wild lake trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Senescence, or the deterioration of functionality with age, varies widely across taxa in pattern and rate. Insights into why and how this variation occurs are hindered by the predominance of lab-focused research on short-lived model species with determinate growth. We synthesize evolutionary theories of senescence, highlight key information gaps, and clarify predictions for species with low mortality and variable degrees of indeterminate growth. Lake trout are an ideal species to evaluate predictions in the wild. We monitored individual males from two populations (1976-2017) longitudinally for changes in adult mortality (actuarial senescence) and body condition (proxy for energy balance). A cross-sectional approach (2017) compared young (ages 4-10 years) and old (18-37 years) adults for (1) phenotypic performance in body condition, and semen quality - which is related to fertility under sperm competition (reproductive senescence), and (2) relative telomere length (potential proxy for cellular senescence). Adult growth in these particular populations is constrained by a simplified food web, and our data support predictions of negligible senescence when maximum size is only slightly larger than maturation size. Negative senescence (aka reverse senescence) may occur in other lake trout populations where diet shifts allow maximum sizes to be much larger than maturation size.
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 | 0.018 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".