Genes to live a really extended lifetime

  • Thread starter Thread starter NeedBioInfo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Genes Lifetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the theoretical possibility of species evolving to have significantly extended lifetimes, including the potential existence of genes that could facilitate such longevity. Participants explore various aspects of lifespan, evolution, and the implications of longer life on species adaptability and cultural evolution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether it is theoretically possible for species, including humans, to evolve towards significantly longer lifespans, while expressing skepticism about true immortality due to the eventual end of the Universe.
  • One participant notes that humans have already increased their lifespan compared to earlier periods, suggesting a trend towards longer life.
  • Another participant proposes that future human evolution may be influenced by women having children later in life, potentially affecting lifespan.
  • A viewpoint is presented that longer lifespans may hinder a species' ability to adapt to environmental changes, citing examples from bacteria and their rapid evolutionary responses.
  • There is mention of a concept called 'physiological time', which suggests that lifespan is related to the number of heartbeats an organism has, leading to discussions about allometric scaling and lifespan correlations.
  • Some participants discuss the relationship between lifespan and metabolic rate, noting that longer-lived species tend to have slower metabolic processes, and highlight that humans may deviate from this trend due to unique evolutionary factors.
  • One participant emphasizes that while human evolution may seem independent of traditional Darwinian processes, it remains unpredictable and influenced by various factors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the potential for extended lifespans and the implications of such changes. There is no consensus on whether longer lifespans are beneficial or detrimental to species adaptability, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the mechanisms and possibilities of evolving extended lifetimes.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific biological concepts, such as metabolic rates and physiological time, which may require further clarification or context. The discussion also touches on the unpredictability of evolution and the influence of cultural factors on human development.

NeedBioInfo
Messages
177
Reaction score
0
Theoretically, could we (as a species) or could something else (as a species) evolve into something that lives a really really really really long time? I mean I really doubt that anything could actually become immortal because I think that the Universe will probably end at some point...

But if the above is possible could the genes to live a really extended lifetime exist? (Even if, or especially if, they haven't been expressed in a living creature so far?)

Just looking for insight/comments

Anyways thanks
 
Biology news on Phys.org
humans are living longer than those cavemen days. Does that help?
 
Is it possible future humans will live much longer from evolution due to women having children much later?
 
There are some studies that propose this idea: Living a long time is a bad idea if you want a species to be able to "change" in a way that is responsive to the environment.

Example: Bacteria have short "lives". That means they go through lots of generations in a short time. It also means they can respond Natural Selection really quickly.
This is why a lot of human pathogenic bacteria are resistant to penicillin - penicillin was first used broadly after World War II. In forty years, by 1985, it had become a lot lesss effective because borad groups of bacteria had become resistant.

If you want to read about why there is a limit to lifetimes, there is a concept of 'physiological time'. In very simple terms it means that organsims of our size and weight live, on average, for a defined number of heartbeats. This is why hummingbirds
live for three-four years and humans more than fifty. This is an oversimplification.
See allometric scaling:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/9/5822

Rather human culture is evolving. There is more change in human culture in one week today, than there was in a human lifetime in the 1200's.
 
I have read there is a strong link between life span and metabolic rate. Longer lived species have slower biological processes, especially metabolism.

A fly in the soup is than mankind has been evolving more or less independent of Darwinian evolution since brain development reached the stage it was a million years or so ago. Hence, our evolution is very much in our hands, therefore, largly unpredictable.
 
kublai said:
...mankind has been evolving more or less independent of Darwinian evolution since brain development reached the stage it was a million years or so ago...
It is still Darwinian evolution, it is just using a different set of criteria for selection.
kublai said:
...Hence, our evolution is very much in our hands, therefore, largly unpredictable.
Evolution is always unpredictable (and I don't mean 'hard to predict', I mean, you can't predict what's going to happen). It is an emergent property - and only obvious after the fact, and that's independent of environmental - or social - factors.
 
Last edited:
NeedBioInfo said:
Theoretically, could we (as a species) or could something else (as a species) evolve into something that lives a really really really really long time?

Such as trees that live for thousands of years?
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_042.html

kublai said:
I have read there is a strong link between life span and metabolic rate. Longer lived species have slower biological processes, especially metabolism.

Yep, there's a very good correlation between life span and metabolic rate (also related to body size). (I don't have the data in front of me...but I recall a Gould article on it.) Humans deviate from that correlation (live longer than our peer species) perhaps due to our slow development (needed to support our complex brain development) and characteristic retention of signs of youth (thank you, sexual selection). I mention this deviation to show that it is possible to evolve a longer lifespan than "normal".

p.s. I agree with DaveC426913 that human are not free from the effects of natural selection, but that's probably a separate debate.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K