33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The comparative immunology of wild and laboratory mice, Mus musculus domesticus

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The laboratory mouse is the workhorse of immunology, used as a model of mammalian immune function, but how well immune responses of laboratory mice reflect those of free-living animals is unknown. Here we comprehensively characterize serological, cellular and functional immune parameters of wild mice and compare them with laboratory mice, finding that wild mouse cellular immune systems are, comparatively, in a highly activated (primed) state. Associations between immune parameters and infection suggest that high level pathogen exposure drives this activation. Moreover, wild mice have a population of highly activated myeloid cells not present in laboratory mice. By contrast, in vitro cytokine responses to pathogen-associated ligands are generally lower in cells from wild mice, probably reflecting the importance of maintaining immune homeostasis in the face of intense antigenic challenge in the wild. These data provide a comprehensive basis for validating (or not) laboratory mice as a useful and relevant immunological model system.

          Abstract

          Laboratory mice are the cornerstone of immunology but how well they represent wild mice is not clear. Here the authors compare and contrast various immune parameters between wild-caught mice and laboratory (C57BL/6) mice and identify a previously unknown myeloid cell population specific to wild mice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Recapitulating adult human immune traits in laboratory mice by normalizing environment

          Our current understanding of immunology was largely defined in laboratory mice because of experimental advantages including inbred homogeneity, tools for genetic manipulation, the ability to perform kinetic tissue analyses starting with the onset of disease, and tractable models. Comparably reductionist experiments are neither technically nor ethically possible in humans. Despite revealing many fundamental principals of immunology, there is growing concern that mice fail to capture relevant aspects of the human immune system, which may account for failures to translate disease treatments from bench to bedside 1–8 . Laboratory mice live in abnormally hygienic “specific pathogen free” (SPF) barrier facilities. Here we show that the standard practice of laboratory mouse husbandry has profound effects on the immune system and that environmental changes result in better recapitulation of features of adult humans. Laboratory mice lack effector-differentiated and mucosally distributed memory T cells, which more closely resembles neonatal than adult humans. These cell populations were present in free-living barn populations of feral mice, pet store mice with diverse microbial experience, and were induced in laboratory mice after co-housing with pet store mice, suggesting a role for environment. Consequences of altering mouse housing profoundly impacted the cellular composition of the innate and adaptive immune system and resulted in global changes in blood cell gene expression patterns that more closely aligned with immune signatures of adult humans rather than neonates, altered the mouse’s resistance to infection, and impacted T cell differentiation to a de novo viral infection. These data highlight the impact of environment on the basal immune state and response to infection and suggest that restoring physiological microbial exposure in laboratory mice could provide a relevant tool for modeling immunological events in free-living organisms, including humans.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            On the subspecific origin of the laboratory mouse.

            The genome of the laboratory mouse is thought to be a mosaic of regions with distinct subspecific origins. We have developed a high-resolution map of the origin of the laboratory mouse by generating 25,400 phylogenetic trees at 100-kb intervals spanning the genome. On average, 92% of the genome is of Mus musculus domesticus origin, and the distribution of diversity is markedly nonrandom among the chromosomes. There are large regions of extremely low diversity, which represent blind spots for studies of natural variation and complex traits, and hot spots of diversity. In contrast with the mosaic model, we found that most of the genome has intermediate levels of variation of intrasubspecific origin. Finally, mouse strains derived from the wild that are supposed to represent different mouse subspecies show substantial intersubspecific introgression, which has strong implications for evolutionary studies that assume these are pure representatives of a given subspecies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Immunological variation between inbred laboratory mouse strains: points to consider in phenotyping genetically immunomodified mice.

              Inbred laboratory mouse strains are highly divergent in their immune response patterns as a result of genetic mutations and polymorphisms. The generation of genetically engineered mice (GEM) has, in the past, used embryonic stem (ES) cells for gene targeting from various 129 substrains followed by backcrossing into more fecund mouse strains. Although common inbred mice are considered "immune competent," many have variations in their immune system-some of which have been described-that may affect the phenotype. Recognition of these immune variations among commonly used inbred mouse strains is essential for the accurate interpretation of expected phenotypes or those that may arise unexpectedly. In GEM developed to study specific components of the immune system, accurate evaluation of immune responses must take into consideration not only the gene of interest but also how the background strain and microbial milieu contribute to the manifestation of findings in these mice. This article discusses points to consider regarding immunological differences between the common inbred laboratory mouse strains, particularly in their use as background strains in GEM.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nat Commun
                Nat Commun
                Nature Communications
                Nature Publishing Group
                2041-1723
                03 May 2017
                2017
                : 8
                : 14811
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol , Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK
                [2 ]Department of Immunology and Infection, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
                Author notes
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3447-3570
                Article
                ncomms14811
                10.1038/ncomms14811
                5418598
                28466840
                8629c503-a8e2-45a9-b1ff-2f48e4fcb01f
                Copyright © 2017, The Author(s)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 08 August 2016
                : 31 January 2017
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article