1
|
Buchheister S, Bleich A. Health Monitoring of Laboratory Rodent Colonies-Talking about (R)evolution. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:1410. [PMID: 34069175 PMCID: PMC8155880 DOI: 10.3390/ani11051410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Revised: 05/02/2021] [Accepted: 05/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
The health monitoring of laboratory rodents is essential for ensuring animal health and standardization in biomedical research. Progress in housing, gnotobiotic derivation, and hygienic monitoring programs led to enormous improvement of the microbiological quality of laboratory animals. While traditional health monitoring and pathogen detection methods still serve as powerful tools for the diagnostics of common animal diseases, molecular methods develop rapidly and not only improve test sensitivities but also allow high throughput analyses of various sample types. Concurrently, to the progress in pathogen detection and elimination, the research community becomes increasingly aware of the striking influence of microbiome compositions in laboratory animals, affecting disease phenotypes and the scientific value of research data. As repeated re-derivation cycles and strict barrier husbandry of laboratory rodents resulted in a limited diversity of the animals' gut microbiome, future monitoring approaches will have to reform-aiming at enhancing the validity of animal experiments. This review will recapitulate common health monitoring concepts and, moreover, outline strategies and measures on coping with microbiome variation in order to increase reproducibility, replicability and generalizability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - André Bleich
- Institute for Laboratory Animal Science, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany;
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Knoblaugh SE, Hohl TM, La Perle KMD. Pathology Principles and Practices for Analysis of Animal Models. ILAR J 2019; 59:40-50. [PMID: 31053847 DOI: 10.1093/ilar/ilz001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2017] [Revised: 01/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Over 60% of NIH extramural funding involves animal models, and approximately 80% to 90% of these are mouse models of human disease. It is critical to translational research that animal models are accurately characterized and validated as models of human disease. Pathology analysis, including histopathology, is essential to animal model studies by providing morphologic context to in vivo, molecular, and biochemical data; however, there are many considerations when incorporating pathology endpoints into an animal study. Mice, and in particular genetically modified models, present unique considerations because these modifications are affected by background strain genetics, husbandry, and experimental conditions. Comparative pathologists recognize normal pathobiology and unique phenotypes that animals, including genetically modified models, may present. Beyond pathology, comparative pathologists with research experience offer expertise in animal model development, experimental design, optimal specimen collection and handling, data interpretation, and reporting. Critical pathology considerations in the design and use of translational studies involving animals are discussed, with an emphasis on mouse models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sue E Knoblaugh
- Department of Veterinary Biosciences, and Comparative Pathology & Mouse Phenotyping Shared Resource, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Tobias M Hohl
- Infectious Diseases Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York
| | - Krista M D La Perle
- Department of Veterinary Biosciences, and Comparative Pathology & Mouse Phenotyping Shared Resource, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Benga L, Sager M, Christensen H. From the [ Pasteurella ] pneumotropica complex to Rodentibacter spp.: an update on [ Pasteurella ] pneumotropica. Vet Microbiol 2018; 217:121-134. [DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2018.03.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2017] [Revised: 02/14/2018] [Accepted: 03/10/2018] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
|
4
|
Abstract
In contrast to contamination by microbes and mycoplasma, which can be relatively easily detected, viral contamination present a serious threat because of the difficulty in detecting some viruses and the lack of effective methods of treating infected cell cultures. While some viruses are capable of causing morphological changes to infected cells (e.g. cytopathic effect) which are detectable by microscopy some viral contaminations result in the integration of the viral genome as provirus, this causes no visual evidence, by means of modification of the cellular morphology. Virus production from such cell lines, are potentially dangerous for other cell cultures (in research labs)by cross contaminations, or for operators and patients (in the case of the production of injectable biologicals) because of potential infection. The only way to keep cell cultures for research, development, and the biotech industry virus-free is the prevention of such contaminations. Cell cultures can become contaminated by the following means: firstly, they may already be contaminated as primary cultures (because the source of the cells was already infected), secondly, they were contaminated due to the use of contaminated raw materials, or thirdly, they were contaminated via an animal passage. This overview describes the problems and risks associated with viral contaminations in animal cell culture, describes the origins of these contaminations as well as the most important virsuses associated with viral contaminations in cell culture. In addition, ways to prevent viral contaminations as well as measures undertaken to avoid and assess risks for viral contaminations as performed in the biotech industry are briefly described.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- O-W Merten
- Généthon III, Evry-Cedex, France (E-mail,
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Treuting PM, Clifford CB, Sellers RS, Brayton CF. Of mice and microflora: considerations for genetically engineered mice. Vet Pathol 2011; 49:44-63. [PMID: 22173977 DOI: 10.1177/0300985811431446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
The phenotype of genetically engineered mice is a combination of both genetic and environmental factors that include the microflora of the mouse. The impact a particular microbe has on a mouse reflects the host-microbe interaction within the context of the mouse genotype and environment. Although often considered a confounding variable, many host-microbe interactions have resulted in the generation of novel model systems and characterization of new microbial agents. Microbes associated with overt disease in mice have been the historical focus of the laboratory animal medical and pathology community and literature. The advent of genetic engineering and the complex of mouse models have revealed previously unknown or disregarded agents that now oblige the attention of the biomedical research community. The purpose of this article is to describe and illustrate how phenotypes can be affected by microflora by focusing on the infectious diseases present in genetically engineered mouse (GEM) colonies of our collective institutions and by reviewing important agents that are rarely seen in most research facilities today. The goal is to introduce the concept of the role of microflora on phenotypes and in translational research using GEM models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P M Treuting
- Department of Comparative Medicine & Histology and Imaging Core, School of Medicine, University of Washington, T140 Health Science Center, Box 357190, Seattle, WA 98195-7190, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Molla Kazemiha V, Azari S, Amanzadeh A, Bonakdar S, Shojaei Moghadam M, Habibi Anbouhi M, Maleki S, Ahmadi N, Mousavi T, Shokrgozar MA. Efficiency of Plasmocin™ on various mammalian cell lines infected by mollicutes in comparison with commonly used antibiotics in cell culture: a local experience. Cytotechnology 2011; 63:609-20. [PMID: 21866311 DOI: 10.1007/s10616-011-9378-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2011] [Accepted: 07/19/2011] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Mycoplasma contamination is a deleterious event for cell culture laboratories. Plasmocin™ is used to prevent and eradicate mycoplasma infections from cell. In this study, 80 different mammalian cell lines from various sources; human, monkey, mice, hamster and rat were used to study and evaluate plasmocin™ efficiency and compare it to commonly used antibiotics such as BM-cyclin, ciprofloxacin and mycoplasma removal agent (MRA). It was shown that mycoplasma infections were eradicated by plasmocin™, BM-cyclin, ciprofloxacin and MRA in 65%, 66.25%, 20%, and 31.25%, respectively, of infected cell cultures. However, re-infection with mycoplasmas after the period of 4 months occurred in 10-80% of the studied cell lines. Cell cytotoxicity and culture death was observed in 25, 17.5 and 10% of the treated cells, for plasmocin™, BM-cyclin and MRA, respectively. In this study, Plasmocin™ showed strong ability to eradicate mollicutes from our cell lines with minimal percentage of regrowth. However, due to its high cell cytotoxicity it should be used with caution especially when dealing with expensive or hard-to-obtain cell lines. Amongst the antibiotics tested, BM-cyclin was shown to remove mycoplasma with the highest efficiency.
Collapse
|
7
|
Peterson NC. From bench to cageside: Risk assessment for rodent pathogen contamination of cells and biologics. ILAR J 2009; 49:310-5. [PMID: 18506064 PMCID: PMC7108569 DOI: 10.1093/ilar.49.3.310] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Many newly developed animal models involve the transfer of cells, serum, or other tissue-derived products into live rodents. These biologics can serve as repositories for adventitious rodent pathogens that, when used in animal studies, can alter research outcomes and result in endemic outbreaks. This review includes a description of some of the biologics that have inadvertently introduced infectious agents into in vivo studies and/or resulted in endemic outbreaks. I also discuss the points of potential exposure of specific biologics to adventitious rodent pathogens as well as the importance of acquiring a complete developmental and testing history of each biologic introduced into a barrier facility. There are descriptions of specific cases of mycoplasma and lactate dehydrogenase–elevating virus (LDHV), two of the most common organisms that contaminate cells and cell byproducts. The information in this article should help investigators and animal resource program personnel to perform an appropriate risk assessment of biologics before their use in in vivo studies that involve rodents.
Collapse
|
8
|
Suppression of acute anti-friend virus CD8+ T-cell responses by coinfection with lactate dehydrogenase-elevating virus. J Virol 2007; 82:408-18. [PMID: 17959678 DOI: 10.1128/jvi.01413-07] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Friend virus (FV) and lactate dehydrogenase-elevating virus (LDV) are endemic mouse viruses that can cause long-term chronic infections in mice. We found that numerous mouse-passaged FV isolates also contained LDV and that coinfection with LDV delayed FV-specific CD8(+) T-cell responses during acute infection. While LDV did not alter the type of acute pathology induced by FV, which was severe splenomegaly caused by erythroproliferation, the immunosuppression mediated by LDV increased both the severity and the duration of FV infection. Compared to mice infected with FV alone, those coinfected with both FV and LDV had delayed CD8(+) T-cell responses, as measured by FV-specific tetramers. This delayed response accounted for the prolonged and exacerbated acute phase of FV infection. Suppression of FV-specific CD8(+) T-cell responses occurred not only in mice infected concomitantly with LDV but also in mice chronically infected with LDV 8 weeks prior to infection with FV. The LDV-induced suppression was not mediated by T regulatory cells, and no inhibition of the CD4(+) T-cell or antibody responses was observed. Considering that most human adults are carriers of chronically infectious viruses at the time of new virus insults and that coinfections with viruses such as human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus are currently epidemic, it is of great interest to determine how infection with one virus may impact host responses to a second infection. Coinfection of mice with LDV and FV provides a well-defined, natural host model for such studies.
Collapse
|
9
|
Hudson A, Ellis JT. Culture of Neospora caninum in the presence of a Mycoplasma Removal Agent results in the selection of a mutant population of tachyzoites. Parasitology 2005; 130:607-10. [PMID: 15977896 DOI: 10.1017/s0031182004007115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
Mycoplasmas are common contaminants of eukaryotic cells grown in tissue culture. A commercially available Mycoplasma Removal Agent (MRA) was therefore assessed for its effect on tachyzoites of Neospora caninum, in order to determine its suitability for further use in parasite cell cultures. Analyses of tachyzoite and excreted-secreted proteins and antigens by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting show that MRA treatment results in the rapid selection of a mutant population that differs from the control and parental lines in its protein and antigen content. The treatment of N. caninum cultures with MRA is therefore not recommended for the eradication of Mycoplasma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Hudson
- Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Technology, Sydney, St Leonard's Campus, Westbourne Street, Gore Hill, NSW 2065, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Bauer BA, Besch-Williford CL, Riley LK. Comparison of the mouse antibody production (MAP) assay and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for the detection of viral contaminants. Biologicals 2005; 32:177-82. [PMID: 15572099 DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2004.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2003] [Accepted: 08/18/2004] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Mouse antibody production (MAP) tests have become the standard assay for the detection of murine viral contamination in biologic materials, such as cell lines and transplantable tumors. However, newly developed PCR assays offer the advantage of lower cost, faster turn around times, and eliminate the use of live animals. In this study, the MAP test and a panel of PCR assays were compared for the detection of 11 different viral contaminants of cell lines and transplantable tumors. The PCR assays had either better or comparable results to the MAP test for all agents tested. The results of this study confirm that PCR assays are an effective method for detection of viral contamination and can be used as an alternative to the MAP test.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beth A Bauer
- Research Animal Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Blank WA, Henderson KS, White LA. Virus PCR assay panels: an alternative to the mouse antibody production test. Lab Anim (NY) 2004; 33:26-32. [PMID: 15235643 PMCID: PMC7091613 DOI: 10.1038/laban0204-26] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2002] [Accepted: 11/17/2003] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Antibody production tests have traditionally been used to test biological materials for viral contamination. Now molecular biology techniques have emerged as an alternative. The authors compare MAP testing with PCR-based detection methods, focusing on differences in animal use, laboratory requirements, sample size, and limits of detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Walter A. Blank
- Charles River Laboratories, 251 Ballardvale Street, Wilmington, 01887 MA
| | | | - Lisa A. White
- Charles River Laboratories, 251 Ballardvale Street, Wilmington, 01887 MA
| |
Collapse
|