Skip to main content

Reproductive performance of genetically engineered mice housed in different housing systems

Abstract

The genetically engineered mice require special husbandry care and are mainly housed in Individually Ventilated Cage (IVC) systems and Static Micro Isolator Cages (SMIC) to minimize the risk for spreading undesirable microorganisms. However, the static micro isolation cage housing like SMIC are being replaced with IVC systems in many facilities due to a number of benefits like a higher density housing in limited space, better protection from biohazards and allergens and decreased work load due to decreased frequency of cage changing required in this system. The purpose of this study was to examine the reproductive performance of genetically engineered mice housed in individually ventilated cages (IVC) and Static Micro Isolator Cages (SMIC). When the B6C3-Tg (APPswe, PSEN1dE9) 85Dbo/Mmjax transgenic mice were housed in these two housing systems, the number of litters per dam, number of pups born per dam and number of pups weaned per dam were found to be slightly higher in the IVC as compared to the SMIC but the difference was not significant (P<0.05). In case of Growth Associated Protein 43 (GAP-43) knockout mice, the number of litters born per dam and the number of pups born per dam were marginally higher in the IVC as compared to those housed in SMIC but the difference was not significant (P<0.05). Only the number of pups weaned per dam were found to be significantly higher as compared to those housed in the SMIC system at P<0.05.

References

  1. 1.

    Brandstetter HI, Scheer M, Heinekamp C, Gippner-Steppert C, Loge O, Ruprecht L, Thull B, Wagner R, Wilhelm P, Scheuber HP; Working Group on Evaluation of IVC Systems of the Animal Welfare Information Center for Biomedical Research of the Faculty of Medicine. Performance evaluation of IVC systems. Lab Anim 2005; 39(1): 40–44.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Baumans V, Schlingmann F, Vonck M, van Lith HA. Individually ventilated cages: beneficial for mice and men? Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci 2002; 41(1): 13–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Reeb C, Jones R, Bearg D, Bedigan H, Myers D, Paigen B. Microenvironment in Ventilated Animal Cages with Differing Ventilation Rates, Mice Populations, and Frequency of Bedding Changes. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci 1998; 37(2): 43–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    R. Sedlacek, R. Orcutt, H. Suit, E. Rose. (Tokai University Press, Tokyo, 1981), vol. 1, pp. 151.

  5. 5.

    Keller LS, White WJ, Snider MT, Lang CM. An evaluation of intra-cage ventilation in three animal caging systems. Lab Anim Sci 1989; 39(3): 237–242.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lipman NS, Corning BF, Coiro MA Sr. The effects of intracage ventilation on microenvironmental conditions in filter-top cages. Lab Anim 1992; 26(3): 206–210.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Minkeviciene R, Rheims S, Dobszay MB, Zilberter M, Hartikainen J, Fülöp L, Penke B, Zilberter Y, Harkany T, Pitkänen A, Tanila H. Amyloid beta-induced neuronal hyperexcitability triggers progressive epilepsy. J Neurosci 2009; 29(11): 3453–3462.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Carlson GA, Borchelt DR, Dake A, Turner S, Danielson V, Coffin JD, Eckman C, Meiners J, Nilsen SP, Younkin S G, Hsiao KK. Genetic modification of the phenotypes produced by amyloid precursor protein overexpression in transgenic mice. Hum Mol Genet 1997; 6(11): 1951–1959.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Krezowski J, Knudson D, Ebeling C, Pitstick R, Giri RK, Schenk D, Westaway D, Younkin L, Younkin SG, Ashe KH, Carlson GA. Identification of loci determining susceptibility to the lethal effects of amyloid precursor protein transgene overexpression. Hum Mol Genet 1989; 13(18): 1989–1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Kosik KS, Orecchio LD, Bruns GA, Benowitz LI, MacDonald GP, Cox DR, Neve RL. Human GAP-43: its deduced amino acid sequence and chromosomal localization in mouse and human. Neuron 1988; 1(2) 127–132.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Metz GA, Schwab ME. Behavioral characterization in a comprehensive mouse test battery reveals motor and sensory impairments in growth-associated protein-43 null mutant mice. Neuroscience 2004; 129(3): 563–574.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Strittmatter SM, Fankhauser C, Huang PL, Mashimo H, Fishman MC. Neuronal pathfinding is abnormal in mice lacking the neuronal growth cone protein GAP-43. Cell 1995; 80(3): 445–452.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Shen Y, Mani S, Donovan SL, Schwob JE, Meiri KF. Growth- associated protein-43 is required for commissural axon guidance in the developing vertebrate nervous system. J Neurosci 2002; 22(1): 239–247.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Maier DL, Mani S, Donovan SL, Soppet D, Tessarollo L, McCasland JS, Meiri KF. Disrupted cortical map and absence of cortical barrels in growth-associated protein (GAP)-43 knockout mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1999; 96(16): 9397–9402.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sretavan DW, Kruger K. Randomized retinal ganglion cell axon routing at the optic chiasm of GAP-43-deficient mice: association with midline recrossing and lack of normal ipsilateral axon turning. J Neurosci 1998; 18(24): 10502–10513.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Rekart JL, Quinn B, Mesulam MM, Routtenberg A. Subfield- specific increase in brain growth protein in postmortem hippocampus of Alzheimer’s patients. Neuroscience 2004; 126(3): 579–584.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Rekart JL, Meiri K, Routtenberg A. Hippocampal-dependent memory is impaired in heterozygous GAP-43 knockout mice. Hippocampus 2005; 15(1): 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Laber K, Veatch LM, Lopez MF, Mulligan JK, Lathers DM. Effects of housing density on weight gain, immune function, behavior, and plasma corticosterone concentrations in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2008; 47(2): 16–23.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Lipman NS. Isolator Rodent Caging Systems (State of the Art): A Critical View. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci 1999; 38(5): 9–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Authors acknowledge Neeraj Jain, Scientist, National Brain Research Centre, Manesar, Haryana, India for his critical viewpoints about the literature and content for the article.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vijay Pal Singh.

Rights and permissions

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yadav, S., Yadav, I., Pratap, K. et al. Reproductive performance of genetically engineered mice housed in different housing systems. Lab Anim Res 33, 68–75 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5625/lar.2017.33.2.68

Download citation

Keywords

  • Reproductive Performance
  • Genetically Engineered Mice
  • Housing System