Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39362359›Full record

ArticleJournal of theoretical biology2024

Agelessness is possible under the disposable soma theory but system complexity makes it unlikely.

Christopher W Rodriguez, Peter W Reddien

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of theoretical biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christopher W RodriguezWhitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, 455 Main Street, Cambridge, 02142, MA, USA.
Peter W ReddienWhitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, 455 Main Street, Cambridge, 02142, MA, USA. Electronic address: reddien@wi.mit.edu.

Funding

Graduate Training in Computational and Systems BiologyT32GM087237 · NIGMS · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI BURGE, CHRISTOPHER B · 2009 to 2023
$4.6M
Stem cell and regeneration regulatory mechanisms in planariansR35GM145345 · NIGMS · WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL RES · PI PETER REDDIEN · 2022 to 2026
$2.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM145345NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM087237
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although demographic studies have failed to find evidence of aging in certain animal species, classic evolutionary theories of aging struggle to explain how evolution could favor agelessness in such cases. Here, we develop mathematical models of the disposable soma theory to identify conditions in which agelessness would be evolutionarily favored. For any given type of damage that could accumulate and cause age-accelerating mortality risk, we find that evolution could select for its complete removal if the mortality risk it poses is severe enough and its repair does not pose too large of a penalty to reproduction. Environmental factors such as extrinsic mortality and the form of population density-dependent regulation also play a large role in determining the optimal rate of aging and whether agelessness should be evolutionarily favored. However, in a system with multiple sources of damage and multiple independent repair processes, avoiding aging is rarely evolutionarily favorable. Pleiotropic repair processes, such as those that could be present in asexual fissioning organisms, make agelessness more likely but do not guarantee it. Our results indicate that agelessness could be favored by evolution in narrow contexts but that multiple types of damage and repair make agelessness unlikely to arise in sufficiently complex organisms.

Indexed as

AgingBiological EvolutionAnimalsModels, BiologicalPopulation DensityAgingDisposable soma theoryEvolutionHydraNegligible senescencePlanaria

Identifiers

PMID39362359
PMCPMC12631733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.