↓ Skip to main content

Presence of Old Individuals in a Population Accelerates and Optimizes the Process of Selection: in silico Experiments

Overview of attention for article published in Biochemistry, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
Title
Presence of Old Individuals in a Population Accelerates and Optimizes the Process of Selection: in silico Experiments
Published in
Biochemistry, February 2018
DOI 10.1134/s0006297918020086
Pubmed ID
Authors

V. A. Chistyakov, Y. V. Denisenko, A. B. Bren

Abstract

One of the important components of the concept of aging-phenoptosis (programmed aging) is the notion of aging as an accelerator of evolution having the rank of subconcept. For many reasons, the main being the problematic experimental testing of evolutionary hypotheses, verification of the above-mentioned subconcept can be based primarily on analysis of the internal inconsistency of heuristic models and their correspondence to undisputedly observed facts. To illustrate the acceleration mechanism, and most importantly to structure the evolutionary process in communities that include naturally weakened individuals, V. P. Skulachev offered in 2003 a conceptual model that he later called a "fable about hares". Despite its simplicity, this model has undoubted internal logic. The natural trend in the development of conceptual models is their translation into the language of mathematics. The purpose of the present work was to create a variation of the known multi-agent model "predator-prey" that would allow us to "see" how the presence in the prey population of naturally weakened (old) members stimulates the selection of individuals with traits whose adaptive potential is not devaluated with age. The model (http://homebear.ru/PD) was developed on the Java platform, version 6, NetBeans development environment 8.2. Statistical analysis and preparation of illustrative materials were carried out using environment R, version 3.4.1. The results of numerical experiments set using our model correspond in principle to the provisions of the heuristic model of Skulachev and, consequently, confirm the absence in it of logical contradictions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 33%
Unknown 2 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 1 33%
Unknown 2 67%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biochemistry
#20,694
of 22,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,740
of 343,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochemistry
#139
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,293 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,860 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.