ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Aging as a consequence of selection to reduce the environmental risk of dying.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Why we age.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Review
- The evolution of ageing: classic theories and emerging ideas.Biogerontology · 2024Review
- Expanding evolutionary theories of ageing to better account for symbioses and interactions throughout the Web of Life.Ageing research reviews · 2023Review
- Fiber-Type Shifting in Sarcopenia of Old Age: Proteomic Profiling of the Contractile Apparatus of Skeletal Muscles.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Insights into the biochemical and biophysical mechanisms mediating the longevity of the transparent optics of the eye lens.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2022Review
- Ageing as "early-life inertia": Disentangling life-history trade-offs along a lifetime of an individual.Evolution letters · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Each animal in the Darwinian theater is exposed to a number of abiotic and biotic risk factors causing mortality. Several of these risk factors are intimately associated with the act of energy acquisition as such and with the amount of reserve the organism has available from this acquisition for overcoming temporary distress. Because a considerable fraction of an individual's lifetime energy acquisition is spent on somatic maintenance, there is a close link between energy expenditure on somatic maintenance and mortality risk. Here, we show, by simple life-history theory reasoning backed up by empirical cohort survivorship data, how reduction of mortality risk might be achieved by restraining allocation to somatic maintenance, which enhances lifetime fitness but results in aging. Our results predict the ubiquitous presence of senescent individuals in a highly diverse group of natural animal populations, which may display constant, increasing, or decreasing mortality with age. This suggests that allocation to somatic maintenance is primarily tuned to expected life span by stabilizing selection and is not necessarily traded against reproductive effort or other traits. Due to this ubiquitous strategy of modulating the somatic maintenance budget so as to increase fitness under natural conditions, it follows that individuals kept in protected environments with very low environmental mortality risk will have their expected life span primarily defined by somatic damage accumulation mechanisms laid down by natural selection in the wild.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.