Cited by 446Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer

The Genetics of Aging

Finch, Caleb E., Ruvkun, Gary·2001·Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics

Abstract

The genetic analysis of life span has only begun in mammals, invertebrates, such as Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila, and yeast. Even at this primitive stage of the genetic analysis of aging, the physiological observations that rate of metabolism is intimately tied to life span is supported. In many examples from mice to worms to flies to yeast, genetic variants that affect life span also modify metabolism. Insulin signaling regulates life span coordinately with reproduction, metabolism, and free radical protective gene regulation in C. elegans. This may be related to the findings that caloric restriction also regulates mammalian aging, perhaps via the modulation of insulin-like signaling pathways. The nervous system has been implicated as a key tissue where insulin-like signaling and free radical protective pathways regulate life span in C. elegans and Drosophila. Genes that determine the life span could act in neuroendocrine cells in diverse animals. The involvement of insulin-like hormones suggests that the plasticity in life spans evident in animal phylogeny may be due to variation in the timing of release of hormones that control vitality and mortality as well as variation in the response to those hormones. Pedigree analysis of human aging may reveal variations in the orthologs of the insulin pathway genes and coupled pathways that regulate invertebrate aging. Thus, genetic approaches may identify a set of circuits that was established in ancestral metazoans to regulate their longevity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.genom.2.1.435

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Finch, C. E., & Ruvkun, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics
Published
2001-09
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
435-462
ISSN
  • 1527-8204 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-293X
OpenAlex
W2103268140
Cited by
446
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 17
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ellison Medical Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Aging › Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Keywords
aging, lifespan, longevity, insulin-like signaling, caloric restriction, metabolism, free radical protection, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila, yeast, neuroendocrine cells, reproduction, pedigree analysis, human aging, evolution of longevity
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Humans, Phylogeny, Polymorphism, Genetic

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