Using non-invasive behavioral and physiological data to measure biological age in wild baboons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biological aging is near-ubiquitous in the animal kingdom, but its timing and pace vary between individuals and over lifespans. Prospective, individual-based studies of wild animals-especially non-human primates-help identify the social and environmental drivers of this variation by indicating the conditions and exposure windows that affect aging processes. However, measuring individual biological age in wild primates is challenging because several of the most promising methods require invasive sampling. Here, we leverage observational data on behavior and physiology, collected non-invasively from 319 wild female baboons across 2402 female-years of study, to develop a composite predictor of age: the non-invasive physiology and behavior (NPB) clock. We found that age predictions from the NPB clock explained 51% of the variation in females' known ages. Further, deviations from the clock's age predictions predicted female survival: females predicted to be older than their known ages had higher adult mortality. Finally, females who experienced harsh early-life conditions were predicted to be about 6 months older than those who grew up in more benign conditions. While the relationship between early adversity and NPB age is noisy, this estimate translates to a predicted 2-3 year reduction in mean adult lifespan in our model. A constraint of our clock is that it is tailored to data collection approaches implemented in our study population. However, many of the clock's components have analogs in other populations, suggesting that non-invasive data can provide broadly applicable insight into heterogeneity in biological age in natural populations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".