ArticleScientific reports2025
Phenogenomic resources immortalized in a panel of wild-derived strains of five species of house mice.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Prdm9 model: independent evolution of hybrid male sterility in house mice.Heredity · 2026Article
- Mouse X-linked microRNA cluster regulates the meiotic checkpoint andProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Eco-evolutionary dynamics of host-microbiome interactions in a natural population of closely related mouse subspecies and their hybrids.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Convergence of gut phage communities but not bacterial communities following wild mouse bacteriophage transplantation into captive house mice.The ISME journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The house mouse, Mus musculus, is a widely used animal model in biomedical research, with classical laboratory strains (CLS) being the most frequently employed. However, the limited genetic variability in CLS hinders their applicability in evolutionary studies. Wild-derived strains (WDS), on the other hand, provide a suitable resource for such investigations. This study quantifies genetic and phenotypic data of 101 WDS representing 5 species, 3 subspecies, and 8 natural Y consomic strains and compares them with CLS. Genetic variability was estimated using whole mtDNA sequences, the Prdm9 gene, and copy number variation at two sex chromosome-linked genes. WDS exhibit a large natural variation with up to 2173 polymorphic sites in mitogenomes, whereas CLS display 92 sites. Moreover, while CLS have two Prdm9 alleles, WDS harbour 46 different alleles. Although CLS resemble M. m. domesticus and M. m. musculus WDS, they differ from them in 10 and 14 out of 16 phenotypic traits, respectively. The results suggest that WDS can be a useful tool in evolutionary and biomedical studies with great potential for medical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.