Histone H3-K27 and H3-K9 methylation does not predict lifespan in divergent populations of Drosophila melanogaster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A universal theory of aging remains elusive despite decades of research. Traditional gerontological research has focused on genetic alterations as the driving unit of the aging processes. Recent breakthroughs in cellular reprogramming, transgenerational epigenetic inheritance, and molecular aging clocks have motivated theories proposing that the disruption of epigenetic regulation is the proximal cause of aging. The claim that aging is fundamentally an epigenetic process, however, is largely based on studies using clonal cell populations and genetically identical organisms. Consequently, there has been limited experimental evidence demonstrating the correlation between epigenetic differences and longevity differences among genetically diverse populations. To address this gap in literature we leveraged laboratory populations of the model organism Drosophila melanogaster. Using sister populations with evolved differences in longevity after more than 1 500 generations of divergent life history selection, we measured the methylation at the H3K27 and H3K9 sites which have previously been shown to become dysregulated with age. Here we report that there were no differences in the amount of H3K27me3 or H3K9me2 between 3 replicate population pairs of the divergent lines. These results do not support that epigenetic dysregulation is the underlying cause of aging. Future studies investigating additional indicators of epigenetic dysregulation are required to clarify the role of epigenetics in aging.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".