Literature DB >> 30026057

Mouse models of maternal immune activation: Mind your caging system!

Flavia S Mueller1, Marcello Polesel2, Juliet Richetto1, Urs Meyer3, Ulrike Weber-Stadlbauer4.   

Abstract

Rodent models of maternal immune activation (MIA) are increasingly used as experimental tools to study neuronal and behavioral dysfunctions in relation to infection-mediated neurodevelopmental disorders. One of the most widely used MIA models is based on gestational administration of poly(I:C) (= polyriboinosinic-polyribocytdilic acid), a synthetic analog of double-stranded RNA that induces a cytokine-associated viral-like acute phase response. The effects of poly(I:C)-induced MIA on phenotypic changes in the offspring are known to be influenced by various factors, including the precise prenatal timing, genetic background, and immune stimulus intensity. Thus far, however, it has been largely ignored whether differences in the basic type of laboratory housing can similarly affect the outcomes of MIA models. Here, we examined this possibility by comparing the poly(I:C)-based MIA model in two housing systems that are commonly used in preclinical mouse research, namely the open cage (OC) and individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems. Pregnant C57BL6/N mice were kept in OCs or IVCs and treated with a low (1 mg/kg, i.v.) or high (5 mg/kg, i.v.) dose of poly(I:C), or with control vehicle solution. MIA or control treatment was induced on gestation day (GD) 9 or 12, and the resulting offspring were raised and maintained in OCs or IVCs until adulthood for behavioral testing. An additional cohort of dams was used to assess the influence of the different caging systems on poly(I:C)-induced cytokine and stress responses in the maternal plasma. Maternal poly(I:C) administration on GD9 caused a dose-dependent increase in spontaneous abortion in IVCs but not in OCs, whereas MIA in IVC systems during a later gestational time-point (GD12) did not affect pregnancy outcomes. Moreover, the precise type of caging system markedly affected maternal cytokines and chemokines at basal states and in response to poly(I:C) and further influenced the maternal levels of the stress hormone, corticosterone. The efficacy of MIA to induce deficits in working memory, social interaction, and sensorimotor gating in the adult offspring was influenced by the different housing conditions, the dosing of poly(I:C), and the precise prenatal timing. Taken together, the present study identifies the basic type of caging system as a novel factor that can confound the outcomes of MIA in mice. Our findings thus urge the need to consider and report the kind of laboratory housing systems used to implement MIA models. Providing this information seems pivotal to yield reproducible results in these models.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Animal model; Autism; Cytokines; Infection; Inflammation; Maternal immune activation (MIA); Poly(I:C); Schizophrenia

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30026057     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2018.07.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Behav Immun        ISSN: 0889-1591            Impact factor:   7.217


  19 in total

1.  Reproducibility of animal research in light of biological variation.

Authors:  Bernhard Voelkl; Naomi S Altman; Anders Forsman; Wolfgang Forstmeier; Jessica Gurevitch; Ivana Jaric; Natasha A Karp; Martien J Kas; Holger Schielzeth; Tom Van de Casteele; Hanno Würbel
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Oral application of clozapine-N-oxide using the micropipette-guided drug administration (MDA) method in mouse DREADD systems.

Authors:  Sina M Schalbetter; Flavia S Mueller; Joseph Scarborough; Juliet Richetto; Ulrike Weber-Stadlbauer; Urs Meyer; Tina Notter
Journal:  Lab Anim (NY)       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 12.625

3.  Building a framework to optimize animal models of maternal immune activation: Like your ongoing home improvements, it's a work in progress.

Authors:  Ryland C Roderick; Amanda C Kentner
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 7.217

Review 4.  Brain changes in a maternal immune activation model of neurodevelopmental brain disorders.

Authors:  Lara Bergdolt; Anna Dunaevsky
Journal:  Prog Neurobiol       Date:  2018-12-24       Impact factor: 11.685

5.  In utero immune programming of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Authors:  Sukanta Jash; Surendra Sharma
Journal:  Hum Immunol       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 2.850

Review 6.  What's wrong with my experiment?: The impact of hidden variables on neuropsychopharmacology research.

Authors:  Hanna M Butler-Struben; Amanda C Kentner; Brian C Trainor
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 8.294

7.  Poly(I:C) Challenge Alters Brain Expression of Oligodendroglia-Related Genes of Adult Progeny in a Mouse Model of Maternal Immune Activation.

Authors:  Xiao-Fan Zhang; Ting Chen; Aifen Yan; Jia Xiao; Yong-Li Xie; Jing Yuan; Pin Chen; Anderson On-Lam Wong; Yang Zhang; Nai-Kei Wong
Journal:  Front Mol Neurosci       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 5.639

8.  Mapping the impact of exposure to maternal immune activation on juvenile Wistar rat brain macro- and microstructure during early post-natal development.

Authors:  Tobias C Wood; Michelle E Edye; Michael K Harte; Joanna C Neill; Eric P Prinssen; Anthony C Vernon
Journal:  Brain Neurosci Adv       Date:  2019-11-04

9.  Behavioral, neuroanatomical, and molecular correlates of resilience and susceptibility to maternal immune activation.

Authors:  Flavia S Mueller; Joseph Scarborough; Sina M Schalbetter; Juliet Richetto; Eugene Kim; Amalie Couch; Yohan Yee; Jason P Lerch; Anthony C Vernon; Ulrike Weber-Stadlbauer; Urs Meyer
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 15.992

10.  Adolescent THC Treatment Does Not Potentiate the Behavioral Effects in Adulthood of Maternal Immune Activation.

Authors:  Todd M Stollenwerk; Cecilia J Hillard
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 6.600

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.