Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

A Molecular Map of Aging

A new genetic database could help reveal why animals age so differently.

By Emily Singer

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Even closely related animals can have drastically different life spans, a fact that scientists have been puzzling over for years. Mice, which live about two years, got the short end of the longevity stick: their rodent cousin, the Southern flying squirrel, can live nearly 20 years. Chimps are 99 percent genetically identical to humans but live only half as long. Now a new resource could help pinpoint the genetic changes that underlie those differences.

Age map: Scientists compared age-related changes in gene expression in mice, humans, flies, and worms to try to pinpoint fundamental biochemical networks involved in aging; the results are shown here. Each row corresponds to a gene, while each column corresponds to a type of tissue. Genes that simultaneously decreased in different tissues of different animals are shown in blue, while those that increased are shown in yellow-green. The top row shows genes involved in energy production; these genes were the only set shown to decrease in every species studied.
Credit: Zahn JM, Poosala S, Owen AB, Ingram DK, Lustig A, et al. (2007) AGEMAP: A Gene Expression Database for Aging in Mice. PLoS Genet 3(11)

In a study of mice, researchers at Stanford University and the National Institute on Aging (NIA) have generated a database that catalogues how gene expression--a measure of how active a gene is--changes in different parts of the body as the animals age. The researchers' findings suggest that different tissues age very differently, and this could help pinpoint when it is appropriate to use mice as a model of human aging--and when it's not.

Previous studies in both mice and humans have examined how gene expression changes with age in specific parts of the body, such as the brain or the kidneys. But the new study, commissioned by the NIA, analyzed simultaneously the activity of thousands of genes in 16 different tissues at different points during the animals' lives. That allowed researchers to compare age-related patterns of gene expression between different organs.

"One of the key lessons of this work is that to understand aging, we need to be thinking not in terms of individual genes, but of networks of genes and systems of different organs," says Daniel Promislow, a biologist at the University of Georgia in Athens, who was not involved in the project.

Story continues below

The results, published this week in the journal PLoS Genetics, confirm the role of two processes believed to be major contributors to aging: slowed metabolism and increased inflammation. The expression of genes linked to both processes changed globally in aging mice. But the researchers also found large disparities in different tissues: expression profiles in the liver, brain, and muscle changed very little with age, while those in the lungs, the eyes, and the thymus (an immune organ) underwent the most radical transformation.

The researchers also found distinct patterns of aging in different tissues: neural, vascular, and endocrine tissue each had a characteristic expression profile. "It appears that the mouse has a mosaic of different things going on which may or may not be in synchrony with each other," says Stuart Kim, a biologist at Stanford who led the work. These patterns of gene-expression changes aren't clearly linked to oxidative stress--an excess of free radicals that damage cells--or other biochemical factors hypothesized to trigger aging, says Kim, so it's not yet clear how they influence aging.

Comments

  • The Myth of 1%
    The study of the impact of genes on aging and the differences between aging in different mammals is of great interest to me and I have been tracking much of the recent research related to extending the lifespan of mice (among other animals) through activation of sir2 gene. Here's a NYTime article summarizine research by David Sinclair of Harvard where he used resveratrol to extend the life of mice by 30-50%: http://www.sirtuins.com/life-extension.html. I did want to point out a factual error made by the author, who blindly states "Chimps are 99 percent genetically identical to humans but live only half as long." The 99% similarity has now been show to be too high, and is currently appearing to be more like 95%, as discussed in the Science June 2007 article "Relative Differences: The Myth of 1%" by Jon Cohen (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/316/5833/1836), and the paper "The evolution of mammalian gene families" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=17183716) which state "Our results imply that humans and chimpanzees differ by at least 6% (1,418 of 22,000 genes) in their complement of genes, which stands in stark contrast to the oft-cited 1.5% difference between orthologous nucleotide sequences. This genomic 'revolving door' of gene gain and loss represents a large number of genetic differences separating humans from our closest relatives."
    Rate this comment: 12345

    tobinehlis
    12/05/2007
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Making 3D Maps on the Move
Technology Review November/December 2009

Current Issue

Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map
The United States has vast supplies of this cleaner fossil fuel. But how should we use it?
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.