Literature DB >> 25381356

General parity between trio and pairwise breeding of laboratory mice in static caging.

Ross M Kedl1, Lawrence J Wysocki2, William J Janssen2, Willi K Born2, Matthew D Rosenbaum2, Julia Granowski2, Jennifer A Kench2, Derek L Fong3, Lisa A Switzer2, Margaret Cruse2, Hua Huang2, Claudia V Jakubzick2, Beata Kosmider2, Katsuyuki Takeda2, Thomas J Stranova2, Randal C Klumm2, Christine Delgado2, Saigiridhar Tummala2, Stijn De Langhe2, John Cambier3, Katherine Haskins3, Laurel L Lenz3, Douglas Curran-Everett2.   

Abstract

Changes made in the 8th edition of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals included new recommendations for the amount of space for breeding female mice. Adopting the new recommendations required, in essence, the elimination of trio breeding practices for all institutions. Both public opinion and published data did not readily support the new recommendations. In response, the National Jewish Health Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee established a program to directly compare the effects of breeding format on mouse pup survival and growth. Our study showed an overall parity between trio and pairwise breeding formats on the survival and growth of the litters, suggesting that the housing recommendations for breeding female mice as stated in the current Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals should be reconsidered.
Copyright © 2014 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25381356      PMCID: PMC4440340          DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1402306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immunol        ISSN: 0022-1767            Impact factor:   5.422


  10 in total

1.  Effects of housing density and cage floor space on three strains of young adult inbred mice.

Authors:  Abigail L Smith; Sarah L Mabus; Cameron Muir; Yong Woo
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 0.982

2.  Explorations in statistics: permutation methods.

Authors:  Douglas Curran-Everett
Journal:  Adv Physiol Educ       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.288

Review 3.  Effects of space allocation and housing density on measures of wellbeing in laboratory mice: a review.

Authors:  A L Whittaker; G S Howarth; D L Hickman
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 2.471

4.  Effects of cage density, sanitation frequency, and bedding type on animal wellbeing and health and cage environment in mice and rats.

Authors:  Mandy J Horn; Shanice V Hudson; Linda A Bostrom; Dale M Cooper
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.232

5.  Effects of housing density and cage floor space on C57BL/6J mice.

Authors:  Abigail L Smith; Sarah L Mabus; Jason D Stockwell; Cameron Muir
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 0.982

6.  The response of C57BL/6J and BALB/cJ mice to increased housing density.

Authors:  Anthony Nicholson; Rachel D Malcolm; Phillip L Russ; Kristin Cough; Chadi Touma; Rupert Palme; Michael V Wiles
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.232

7.  Effects of housing density on weight gain, immune function, behavior, and plasma corticosterone concentrations in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice.

Authors:  Kathy Laber; Lynn M Veatch; Marcelo F Lopez; Jennifer K Mulligan; Deanne M R Lathers
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.232

8.  Effects of cage density on behavior in young adult mice.

Authors:  Lauren P Davidson; Alan L Chedester; Marlene N Cole
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 0.982

9.  Physiological effects of housing density on C57BL/6J mice over a 9-month period.

Authors:  B Paigen; K L Svenson; R Von Smith; M A Marion; T Stearns; L L Peters; A L Smith
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Effects of housing density in five inbred strains of mice.

Authors:  Judith L Morgan; Karen L Svenson; Jeffrey P Lake; Weidong Zhang; Timothy M Stearns; Michael A Marion; Luanne L Peters; Beverly Paigen; Leah Rae Donahue
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total
  4 in total

1.  Retrospective Analysis of Reproductive Performance of Pair-bred Compared with Trio-bred Mice.

Authors:  Katherine Wasson
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 1.232

2.  Effects of Trio and Pair Breeding of Mice on Environmental Parameters and Nasal Pathology and Their Implications for Cage Change Frequency.

Authors:  Kelsey C Carpenter; Sarah E Thurston; Mark J Hoenerhoff; Jennifer L Lofgren
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Effect of Continuous Trio Breeding Compared with Continuous Pair Breeding in 'Shoebox' Caging on Measures of Reproductive Performance in Estrogen Receptor Knockout Mice.

Authors:  Tom T Chatkupt; Nicole L Libal; Sarah L Mader; Stephanie J Murphy; Kim E Saunders
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 4.  Recommended housing densities for research mice: filling the gap in data-driven alternatives.

Authors:  Karen L Svenson; Beverly Paigen
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 5.834

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.