Cited by 625Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsSirtuins and Resveratrol in MedicineNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research

Absence of effects of Sir2 overexpression on lifespan in C. elegans and Drosophila

Open access
Burnett, Camilla, Valentini, Sara, Cabreiro, Filipe, Goss, Martin, Somogyvári, Milán, Piper, Matthew D., Hoddinott, Matthew, Sutphin, George L. +15 more·2011·Nature

Abstract

Overexpression of sirtuins (NAD(+)-dependent protein deacetylases) has been reported to increase lifespan in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila melanogaster. Studies of the effects of genes on ageing are vulnerable to confounding effects of genetic background. Here we re-examined the reported effects of sirtuin overexpression on ageing and found that standardization of genetic background and the use of appropriate controls abolished the apparent effects in both C. elegans and Drosophila. In C. elegans, outcrossing of a line with high-level sir-2.1 overexpression abrogated the longevity increase, but did not abrogate sir-2.1 overexpression. Instead, longevity co-segregated with a second-site mutation affecting sensory neurons. Outcrossing of a line with low-copy-number sir-2.1 overexpression also abrogated longevity. A Drosophila strain with ubiquitous overexpression of dSir2 using the UAS-GAL4 system was long-lived relative to wild-type controls, as previously reported, but was not long-lived relative to the appropriate transgenic controls, and nor was a new line with stronger overexpression of dSir2. These findings underscore the importance of controlling for genetic background and for the mutagenic effects of transgene insertions in studies of genetic effects on lifespan. The life-extending effect of dietary restriction on ageing in Drosophila has also been reported to be dSir2 dependent. We found that dietary restriction increased fly lifespan independently of dSir2. Our findings do not rule out a role for sirtuins in determination of metazoan lifespan, but they do cast doubt on the robustness of the previously reported effects of sirtuins on lifespan in C. elegans and Drosophila.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature10296

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent reports fail to show robust effects of SIRT on lifespan in C. elegans and Drosophila.

    “recent reports fail to show robust effects of SIRT on lifespan in these same model systems (56).”

    From Redox regulation of mitochondrial function (2012) · cites this paper as [56]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burnett, C., Valentini, S., Cabreiro, F., Goss, M., Somogyvári, M., Piper, M. D., Hoddinott, M., Sutphin, G. L., Leko, V., McElwee, J. J., Vazquez-Manrique, R. P., Orfila, A.-M., Ackerman, D., Au, C., Vinti, G., Riesen, M., Howard, K., Neri, C., Bedalov, A., Kaeberlein, M., Sőti, C., Partridge, L., & Gems, D.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Semmelweis University (HU)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • MRC Laboratory for Molecular Cell Biology (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing (DE)
Corresponding author
Gems, David
Venue
Nature
Published
2011-09
Volume
477
Issue
7365
Pages
482-485
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2074974899
Cited by
624
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 71 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 98 · 2012: 100
FWCI
32.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (081394)
  • European Commission
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG031108, T32AG000057)
  • National Cancer Institute (CA129132, R01CA129132)
  • National Center for Research Resources
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Aging › Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Sirtuins and Resveratrol in Medicine
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Keywords
Sir2, sirtuins, lifespan extension, aging, dietary restriction, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila melanogaster, outcrossing, sensory neurons, NAD+-dependent deacetylase
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Crosses, Genetic, Drosophila melanogaster, Female, Histone Deacetylases, Longevity, Male, RNA, Messenger, Gene Expression, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila Proteins, Caenorhabditis elegans Proteins, Animals, Genetically Modified, Caloric Restriction, Sirtuins

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review