Is antagonistic pleiotropy ubiquitous in aging biology?

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Steven N Austad, Jessica M Hoffman
{"title":"Is antagonistic pleiotropy ubiquitous in aging biology?","authors":"Steven N Austad,&nbsp;Jessica M Hoffman","doi":"10.1093/emph/eoy033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Lay Summary: An evolutionary mechanism of aging was hypothesized 60 years ago to be the genetic trade-off between early life fitness and late life mortality. Genetic evidence supporting this hypothesis was unavailable then, but has accumulated recently. These tradeoffs, known as antagonistic pleiotropy, are common, perhaps ubiquitous. George Williams' 1957 paper developed the antagonistic pleiotropy hypothesis of aging, which had previously been hinted at by Peter Medawar. Antagonistic pleiotropy, as it applies to aging, hypothesizes that animals possess genes that enhance fitness early in life but diminish it in later life and that such genes can be favored by natural selection because selection is stronger early in life even as they cause the aging phenotype to emerge. No genes of the sort hypothesized by Williams were known 60 years ago, but modern molecular biology has now discovered hundreds of genes that, when their activity is enhanced, suppressed, or turned off, lengthen life and enhance health under laboratory conditions. Does this provide strong support for Williams' hypothesis? What are the implications of Williams' hypothesis for the modern goal of medically intervening to enhance and prolong human health? Here we briefly review the current state of knowledge on antagonistic pleiotropy both under wild and laboratory conditions. Overall, whenever antagonistic pleiotropy effects have been seriously investigated, they have been found. However, not all trade-offs are directly between reproduction and longevity as is often assumed. The discovery that antagonistic pleiotropy is common if not ubiquitous implies that a number of molecular mechanisms of aging may be widely shared among organisms and that these mechanisms of aging can be potentially alleviated by targeted interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12156,"journal":{"name":"Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health","volume":"2018 1","pages":"287-294"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/emph/eoy033","citationCount":"105","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/emph/eoy033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 105

Abstract

Lay Summary: An evolutionary mechanism of aging was hypothesized 60 years ago to be the genetic trade-off between early life fitness and late life mortality. Genetic evidence supporting this hypothesis was unavailable then, but has accumulated recently. These tradeoffs, known as antagonistic pleiotropy, are common, perhaps ubiquitous. George Williams' 1957 paper developed the antagonistic pleiotropy hypothesis of aging, which had previously been hinted at by Peter Medawar. Antagonistic pleiotropy, as it applies to aging, hypothesizes that animals possess genes that enhance fitness early in life but diminish it in later life and that such genes can be favored by natural selection because selection is stronger early in life even as they cause the aging phenotype to emerge. No genes of the sort hypothesized by Williams were known 60 years ago, but modern molecular biology has now discovered hundreds of genes that, when their activity is enhanced, suppressed, or turned off, lengthen life and enhance health under laboratory conditions. Does this provide strong support for Williams' hypothesis? What are the implications of Williams' hypothesis for the modern goal of medically intervening to enhance and prolong human health? Here we briefly review the current state of knowledge on antagonistic pleiotropy both under wild and laboratory conditions. Overall, whenever antagonistic pleiotropy effects have been seriously investigated, they have been found. However, not all trade-offs are directly between reproduction and longevity as is often assumed. The discovery that antagonistic pleiotropy is common if not ubiquitous implies that a number of molecular mechanisms of aging may be widely shared among organisms and that these mechanisms of aging can be potentially alleviated by targeted interventions.

Abstract Image

拮抗性多效性在衰老生物学中普遍存在吗?
综述:60年前,人们假设衰老的进化机制是早期健康和晚期死亡率之间的基因权衡。支持这一假设的基因证据当时还不可用,但最近已经积累起来。这些权衡,被称为拮抗多效性,是常见的,也许无处不在。乔治·威廉姆斯1957年的论文提出了衰老的拮抗多效性假说,此前彼得·梅达瓦尔曾暗示过这一假说。拮抗性多效性适用于衰老,它假设动物拥有在生命早期增强健康但在晚年减少健康的基因,并且这些基因可以受到自然选择的青睐,因为在生命早期选择更强,即使它们会导致衰老表型的出现。60年前,威廉姆斯假设的这类基因还不为人所知,但现代分子生物学现在已经发现了数百种基因,当它们的活性增强、抑制或关闭时,它们可以在实验室条件下延长寿命并增强健康。这是否有力地支持了威廉姆斯的假设?威廉姆斯的假说对医学干预以增强和延长人类健康的现代目标有什么启示?在这里,我们简要回顾了在野生和实验室条件下拮抗多效性的知识现状。总的来说,每当拮抗多效性效应被认真研究时,就会发现它们。然而,并不是所有的权衡都像人们通常认为的那样,直接在繁殖和寿命之间进行。拮抗性多效性是常见的,如果不是普遍存在的话,这一发现意味着许多衰老的分子机制可能在生物体之间广泛共享,并且这些衰老机制可以通过有针对性的干预来缓解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health
Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health Environmental Science-Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
2.70%
发文量
37
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: About the Journal Founded by Stephen Stearns in 2013, Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health is an open access journal that publishes original, rigorous applications of evolutionary science to issues in medicine and public health. It aims to connect evolutionary biology with the health sciences to produce insights that may reduce suffering and save lives. Because evolutionary biology is a basic science that reaches across many disciplines, this journal is open to contributions on a broad range of topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信