Speakman John R, Selman Colin, McLaren Jane S, Harper E Jean
Aberdeen Centre for Energy Regulation and Obesity, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
J Nutr. 2002 Jun;132(6 Suppl 2):1583S-97S. doi: 10.1093/jn/132.6.1583S.
The idea that aging should be linked to energy expenditure has a long history that can be traced to the late 1800s and the industrial revolution. Machines that are run fast wear out more quickly, so the notion was born that humans and animals might experience similar fates: the faster they live (expressed as greater energy expenditure), the sooner they die. Evidence supporting the "rate-of-living" theory was gleaned from the scaling of resting metabolism and life span as functions of body mass. The product of these factors yields a mass-invariant term, equivalent to the "amount of living." There are at least four problems with this evidence, which are summarized and reviewed in this communication: 1) life span is a poor measure of aging, 2) resting metabolism is a poor measure of energy expenditure, 3) the effects are confounded by body mass and 4) the comparisons made are not phylogenetically independent. We demonstrate that there is a poor association between resting metabolic rate (RMR) and daily energy expenditure (DEE) measured using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method at the level of species. Nevertheless, the scaling relation between DEE and body mass still has the same scaling exponent as the RMR and body mass relationship. Thus, if we use DEE rather than RMR in the analysis, the rate-of-living ideas are still supported. Data for 13 species of small mammal were obtained, where energy demands by DLW and longevity were reliably known. In these species, there was a strong negative relationship between residual longevity and residual DEE, both with the effects of body mass removed (r(2) = 0.763, F = 32.1, P < 0.001). Hence, the association of energy demands and life span is not attributed to the confounding effects of body size. We subjected these latter data to an analysis that extracts phylogenetically independent contrasts, and the relationship remained significant (r(2) = 0.815, F = 39.74, P < 0.001). Small mammals that live fast really do die young. However, there are very large differences between species in the amounts of living that each enjoy and these disparities are even greater when other taxa are included in the comparisons. Such differences are incompatible with the "rate-of-living" theory. However, the link between energetics and aging across species is reconcilable within the framework of the "free-radical damage hypothesis" and the "disposable soma hypothesis." Within species one might anticipate the rate-of-living model would be more appropriate. We reviewed data generated from three different sources to evaluate whether this were so, studies in which metabolic rate is experimentally increased and impacts on life span followed, studies of caloric restriction and studies where links between natural variation in metabolism and life span are sought. This review reveals that there might be contrasting effects of resting and nonresting energy expenditure on aging, with increases in the former being protective and increases in the latter being harmful.
衰老与能量消耗相关的观点有着悠久的历史,可以追溯到19世纪末和工业革命时期。运转速度快的机器磨损得更快,因此人们产生了这样的观念:人类和动物可能会经历类似的命运:它们活得越快(表现为能量消耗越大),死亡就越早。支持“生活速率”理论的证据来自于静息代谢和寿命随体重变化的关系。这些因素的乘积产生了一个与体重无关的项,相当于“生命的量”。这一证据至少存在四个问题,本通讯将对其进行总结和回顾:1)寿命不是衡量衰老的好指标;2)静息代谢不是衡量能量消耗的好指标;3)这些影响被体重混淆了;4)所做的比较在系统发育上不是独立的。我们证明,在物种水平上,使用双标水(DLW)法测量的静息代谢率(RMR)与每日能量消耗(DEE)之间的关联很差。然而,DEE与体重之间的标度关系仍然与RMR和体重关系具有相同的标度指数。因此,如果我们在分析中使用DEE而不是RMR,“生活速率”的观点仍然得到支持。我们获得了13种小型哺乳动物的数据,这些动物的能量需求和寿命通过DLW法得到了可靠的测定。在这些物种中,去除体重影响后,剩余寿命与剩余DEE之间存在很强的负相关关系(r² = 0.763,F = 32.1,P < 0.001)。因此,能量需求与寿命之间的关联并非归因于体型的混淆效应。我们对这些数据进行了分析,提取了系统发育上独立的对比,这种关系仍然显著(r² = 0.815,F = 39.74,P < 0.001)。活得快的小型哺乳动物确实死得早。然而,不同物种在各自享有的生命量上存在很大差异,当将其他分类群纳入比较时,这些差异甚至更大。这种差异与“生活速率”理论不相容。然而,跨物种的能量学与衰老之间的联系在“自由基损伤假说”和“可抛弃体细胞假说”的框架内是可以协调的。在物种内部,人们可能会预期“生活速率”模型会更合适。我们回顾了来自三个不同来源的数据,以评估是否如此,这些研究包括实验性提高代谢率并跟踪对寿命的影响、热量限制研究以及寻求代谢自然变异与寿命之间联系的研究。这一回顾表明,静息和非静息能量消耗对衰老可能有相反的影响,前者的增加具有保护作用,而后者的增加则有害。