Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33505381›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2020

A Model System for Feralizing Laboratory Mice in Large Farmyard-Like Pens.

Henriette Arnesen, Linn Emilie Knutsen, Bente Wabakken Hognestad, Grethe Marie Johansen, Mats Bemark, Oliver Pabst, Anne Kristine Storset, Preben Boysen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A gavage-fomite based method to generate mouse models with natural microbiota.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Henriette ArnesenFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Linn Emilie KnutsenFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Bente Wabakken HognestadFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Grethe Marie JohansenFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Mats BemarkDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Oliver PabstInstitute of Molecular Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Anne Kristine StorsetFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Preben BoysenFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Norwegian University of Life Sciences · NORWTH Aachen University · DEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratory mice are typically housed under extremely clean laboratory conditions, far removed from the natural lifestyle of a free-living mouse. There is a risk that this isolation from real-life conditions may lead to poor translatability and misinterpretation of results. We and others have shown that feral mice as well as laboratory mice exposed to naturalistic environments harbor a more diverse gut microbiota and display an activated immunological phenotype compared to hygienic laboratory mice. We here describe a naturalistic indoors housing system for mice, representing a farmyard-type habitat typical for house mice. Large open pens were installed with soil and domestic animal feces, creating a highly diverse microbial environment and providing space and complexity allowing for natural behavior. Laboratory C57BL/6 mice were co-housed in this system together with wild-caught feral mice, included as a source of murine microbionts. We found that mice feralized in this manner displayed a gut microbiota structure similar to their feral cohabitants, such as higher relative content of Firmicutes and enrichment of Proteobacteria. Furthermore, the immunophenotype of feralized mice approached that of feral mice, with elevated levels of memory T-cells and late-stage NK cells compared to laboratory-housed control mice, indicating antigenic experience and immune training. The dietary elements presented in the mouse pens could only moderately explain changes in microbial colonization, and none of the immunological changes. In conclusion, this system enables various types of studies using genetically controlled mice on the background of adaptation to a high diversity microbial environment and a lifestyle natural for the species.

Indexed as

animal modelferalized miceferal micegut micobiotaimmune experiencemicenaturalistic environmenttrained immunity

Identifiers

PMID33505381
PMCPMC7830425
OpenAlexW3120624959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.