Literature DB >> 17091318

Gene-environment interactions differentially affect mouse strain behavioral parameters.

Valter Tucci1, Heena V Lad, Andy Parker, Sian Polley, Steve D M Brown, Patrick M Nolan.   

Abstract

Systematic phenotyping of mouse strains and mutants generated through genome-wide mutagenesis programs promises to deliver a wealth of functional genetic information. To this end, the appropriation of a standard series of phenotyping protocols is desirable to produce data sets that are consistent within and across laboratories and across time. Standard phenotyping protocols such as EMPReSS (European Mouse Phenotyping Resource for Standardised Screens) provide a series of protocols aimed at phenotyping multiple body systems that could realistically be adopted and/or reproduced in any laboratory. This includes a series of neurologic and behavioral screens, bearing in mind that this class of phenotype is well represented in targeted mutants and mutagenesis screens. Having cross-validated screening batteries in a number of laboratories and in a number of commonly used inbred strains, our group was interested in establishing whether subtle changes in cage environment could affect behavioral test outcome. Aside from unavoidable quantitative differences in test outcome, we identified significant and distinct genotype-environment-test interactions. For example, specific strain order in open-field center entries and total distance traveled can be reversed depending on the form of enrichment used, while prepulse inhibition of the acoustic startle response is, even quantitatively, unaffected by the enrichment condition. Our findings argue that unless systematically recorded, behavioral studies conducted under subtle variations in cage environment may lead to data misinterpretation, although this could be limited to particular behaviors. Further investigations into the extent and limits of genetic and environmental variables are critical for the realization of both behavioral and functional genomics endpoints.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17091318     DOI: 10.1007/s00335-006-0075-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mamm Genome        ISSN: 0938-8990            Impact factor:   2.957


  11 in total

1.  Influences of laboratory environment on behavior.

Authors:  Elissa J Chesler; Sonya G Wilson; William R Lariviere; Sandra L Rodriguez-Zas; Jeffrey S Mogil
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Environmental enrichment reduces Abeta levels and amyloid deposition in transgenic mice.

Authors:  Orly Lazarov; John Robinson; Ya-Ping Tang; Ilana S Hairston; Zeljka Korade-Mirnics; Virginia M-Y Lee; Louis B Hersh; Robert M Sapolsky; Karoly Mirnics; Sangram S Sisodia
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2005-03-11       Impact factor: 41.582

3.  Comprehensive observational assessment: Ia. A systematic, quantitative procedure for assessing the behavioral and physiologic state of the mouse.

Authors:  S Irwin
Journal:  Psychopharmacologia       Date:  1968-09-20

4.  Common variations in the pretest environment influence genotypic comparisons in models of anxiety.

Authors:  G S Izídio; D M Lopes; L Spricigo; A Ramos
Journal:  Genes Brain Behav       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.449

5.  Genetics of mouse behavior: interactions with laboratory environment.

Authors:  J C Crabbe; D Wahlsten; B C Dudek
Journal:  Science       Date:  1999-06-04       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Laboratory animal welfare: cage enrichment and mouse behaviour.

Authors:  David P Wolfer; Oxana Litvin; Samuel Morf; Roger M Nitsch; Hans-Peter Lipp; Hanno Würbel
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-12-16       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Assessment of the use of two commercially available environmental enrichments by laboratory mice by preference testing.

Authors:  Pascalle L P Van Loo; Harry J M Blom; Margot K Meijer; Vera Baumans
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.471

8.  Environmental enrichment mitigates cognitive deficits in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Joanna L Jankowsky; Tatiana Melnikova; Daniel J Fadale; Guilian M Xu; Hilda H Slunt; Victoria Gonzales; Linda H Younkin; Steven G Younkin; David R Borchelt; Alena V Savonenko
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-05-25       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Phenotypic expression of the targeted null-mutation in the dopamine transporter gene varies as a function of the genetic background.

Authors:  Elise Morice; Cécile Denis; Bruno Giros; Marika Nosten-Bertrand
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.386

10.  EMPReSS: standardized phenotype screens for functional annotation of the mouse genome.

Authors:  S D M Brown; P Chambon; M Hrabé de Angelis
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 38.330

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  Environmental enrichment of laboratory rodents: the answer depends on the question.

Authors:  Linda A Toth; Kevin Kregel; Lisa Leon; Timothy I Musch
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 0.982

Review 2.  Refining psychiatric genetics: from 'mouse psychiatry' to understanding complex human disorders.

Authors:  Justin L Laporte; Renee F Ren-Patterson; Dennis L Murphy; Allan V Kalueff
Journal:  Behav Pharmacol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.293

Review 3.  High-throughput mouse phenomics for characterizing mammalian gene function.

Authors:  Steve D M Brown; Chris C Holmes; Ann-Marie Mallon; Terrence F Meehan; Damian Smedley; Sara Wells
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 53.242

4.  Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: a cross-laboratory study.

Authors:  Silvia Mandillo; Valter Tucci; Sabine M Hölter; Hamid Meziane; Mumna Al Banchaabouchi; Magdalena Kallnik; Heena V Lad; Patrick M Nolan; Abdel-Mouttalib Ouagazzal; Emma L Coghill; Karin Gale; Elisabetta Golini; Sylvie Jacquot; Wojtek Krezel; Andy Parker; Fabrice Riet; Ilka Schneider; Daniela Marazziti; Johan Auwerx; Steve D M Brown; Pierre Chambon; Nadia Rosenthal; Glauco Tocchini-Valentini; Wolfgang Wurst
Journal:  Physiol Genomics       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 3.107

5.  Methodological considerations for measuring spontaneous physical activity in rodents.

Authors:  Jennifer A Teske; Claudio E Perez-Leighton; Charles J Billington; Catherine M Kotz
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 3.619

6.  An approach to monitoring home-cage behavior in mice that facilitates data sharing.

Authors:  Edoardo Balzani; Matteo Falappa; Fuat Balci; Valter Tucci
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 13.491

7.  A novel rat strain with enhanced sensitivity to the effects of dopamine agonists on startle gating.

Authors:  Neal R Swerdlow; Michelle Breier; Adrienne B Mora; David Ko; Jody M Shoemaker
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2007-09-04       Impact factor: 3.533

Review 8.  New insights into behaviour using mouse ENU mutagenesis.

Authors:  Peter L Oliver; Kay E Davies
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2012-08-13       Impact factor: 6.150

9.  Location- and sex-specific differences in weight and motor coordination in two commonly used mouse strains.

Authors:  Attila D Kovács; David A Pearce
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Mouse models of polyglutamine diseases: review and data table. Part I.

Authors:  Maciej Figiel; Wojciech J Szlachcic; Pawel M Switonski; Agnieszka Gabka; Wlodzimierz J Krzyzosiak
Journal:  Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 5.590

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.