| Literature DB >> 34284628 |
Mark Roper1, Pol Capdevila1,2, Roberto Salguero-Gómez1,3,4.
Abstract
Patterns of ageing across the tree of life are much more diverse than previously thought. Yet, we still do not adequately understand how, why and where across the tree of life a particular pattern of ageing will evolve. An ability to predict ageing patterns requires a firmer understanding of how and why different ecological and evolutionary factors alter the sensitivity of fitness to age-related changes in mortality and reproduction. From this understanding, we can ask why and where selection gradients might not decline with age. Here, we begin by summarizing the recent breadth of literature that is unearthing, empirically and theoretically, the mechanisms that drive variation in patters of senescence. We focus on the relevance of two key parameters, population structure and reproductive value, as key to understanding selection gradients, and therefore senescence. We discuss how growth form, individual trade-offs, stage structure and social interactions may all facilitate differing distributions of these two key parameters than those predicted by classical theory. We argue that these four key aspects can help us understand why patterns of negligible and negative senescence can actually be explained under the same evolutionary framework as classical senescence.Entities:
Keywords: ageing; demography; life history; senescence; trade-off
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34284628 PMCID: PMC8292751 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.0851
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
Figure 1The evolution of and escape from senescence across multicellular life. Positive, negligible and negative patterns of actuarial senescence are dispersed throughout the four examined clades, with the percentages of each pattern within each clade shown in the bar charts of each of the figures. (a) Actuarial senescence across animals. Depicted around the phylogeny are six representative species, displaying positive (red), negligible (yellow) and negative (blue) senescence from each clade. Clockwise, representing invertebrates, these species are Pa. longicarpus, D. pulex and L. virgulata. For vertebrates, again clockwise, these species are A. alces, P. expansa and Poecilia reticulata. (b) Actuarial senescence across plants. Depicted around the phylogeny are six representative species, displaying positive (red), negligible (yellow) and negative (blue) senescence from each clade. For gymnosperms, these species are Pi. lambertiana, Pi. sylvestris and Taxus floridana. For angiosperms, these species are Hypochaeris radicata, Rhododendron maximum and Opuntia rastrera. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2Age-based patterns of survivorship (l(x)—red) and reproduction (m(x)—black) are often decoupled, whereas reproductive value and stable age distributions predict the patterns of senescence. (a) l(x) and m(x) trajectories for the six selected animal species from figure 1. (b) Stable (st)age and reproductive value trajectories for the six selected animal species from figure 1. (c) l(x) and m(x) trajectories for the six selected plant species from figure 1. (d) Stable (st)age and reproductive value trajectories for the six selected plant species from figure 1. l(x) and m(x) trajectories are conditional upon reaching the age of maturity, at which the mature cohort is defined to have entered adulthood with a survivorship of 1. The trajectories of l(x) and m(x) run from age at maturity to the age at which 5% of the mature cohort is still alive. Stable (st)age and reproductive value trajectories are displayed for the whole life course. (Online version in colour.)