National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$51.75
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Microbial Status and Genetic Evaluation of Mice and Rats: Proceedings of the 1999 US/Japan Conference (2000)
Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR)

Citation Manager

. "Rat Genetics and Toxicology." Microbial Status and Genetic Evaluation of Mice and Rats: Proceedings of the 1999 US/Japan Conference. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2000.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
98
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Microbial Status and Genetic Evaluation of Mice and Rats: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1999 US/JAPAN CONFERENCE

Given that there is substantial, and economically important, genetic variation in humans in response to xenobiotics and that rats are widely used in toxicology and pharmacology, the failure to seek genetic variation in rats, which could be used as a model of similar conditions in humans, is surprising. Unless toxicologists change their research tactics they will fail to benefit from the enormous advances currently being made in molecular genetics.

INTRODUCTION

It is now 20 years since ILAR published an excellent set of guidelines on “Laboratory Animal Management: Genetics” (ILAR 1979). These guidelines described the main types of strains and stocks then available to research workers, which included inbred strains and their derivatives such as congenic strains and recombinant inbred strains, mutants, and “stocks not genetically defined,” including outbred stocks.

In a discussion of the choice of inbred strains versus outbred stocks, the guidelines suggest, “An investigator working with species for which inbred strains are available would be well advised to use them. ” The serious limitations of genetically undefined strains were emphasized. Although such animals may be cheaper, they will be phenotypically more variable so that larger numbers are needed, they are subject to genetic drift, and colonies with the same name from different breeders may differ to a serious extent. Moreover, since that time there have been many papers published that describe the valuable properties of inbred strains and the limitations of outbred stocks (Festing 1990, 1995, 1997a,c; Festing and Wolff 1995). Yet, outbred stocks continue to be used widely, even though no scientific justification for their continued use appears to have been published in the last 20 years.

In contrast, inbred strains, which have been described as “immortal clones of genetically identical individuals,” tend to be highly uniform, they stay genetically constant for long periods, the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of most strains are well documented, and genetic quality control is relatively easy using DNA genetic markers (Festing 1997b).

FROM THE LITERATURE

Strain Differences in Response to Xenobiotics

Genetic variation in response to xenobiotics is seen most clearly as strain or stock differences, in experiments that have used more than one strain (for convenience the term strain will be used to indicate both inbred strains and outhred stocks). Examples include differences in response to DMBA among three rat strains in which strain COP was totally resistant to a dose of carcinogen that caused 100% mammary tumours in WF, with F344 being intermediate (Moore

Page
98
Front Matter (R1-R16)
Opening Remarks, Judith Vaitukaitis (1-3)
Opening Remarks, Shin-Ichi Ota (4-5)
Introductory Comments on Microbiologic Testing of Laboratory Mice and Rats: Uniformity of Results (6-6)
Development of a Performance Assessment Program for Research Animal Diagnostic Laboratories and Defining Microbiologic Testing Standards (7-10)
Standardization of Rodent Health Surveillance: Regulation Versus Competition (11-15)
Factors Causing Difficulties in Uniformity of Results Among Testing Facilities in Microbiologic Monitoring of Laboratory Animals (16-20)
Necessity of Reexamining the Pathogenicity and Elimination of Parasites in Rats and Mice (21-26)
Emerging (and Reemerging) Viruses of Laboratory Mice and Rats (27-34)
Emerging Infections as a Cause of Concern (35-39)
Emerging Diseases in Mice and Rats (40-43)
Survey of Heliobacter Species in Laboratory Mice and Gerbils in Japan (44-46)
Genetic Evaluation of Outbred Rats (47-50)
Genetic Evaluation of Outbred Rats from the Breeder's Perspective (51-64)
Concept for Establishment of Rat Outbred Global Standard Strains (65-76)
Necessity of Genetic and Microbiologic Quality Network from the Pharmaceutical Industry's Perspective (77-84)
International Harmonization of Laboratory Animals (85-96)
Rat Genetics and Toxicology (97-104)
A Phenotype-driven Approach to the Molecular and Functional Analysis of the Mouse Genome (105-115)
Evaluation of Targeted Mutations (116-118)
Defining Behavioral Phenotypes in Transgenic and Knockout Mice (119-129)
Defining Phenotype in Genetically Engineered Mice (130-131)
Development of the Mouse Model Dramatype for Human Clinical Benefit (132-136)
Concluding Remarks (137-137)
Implication of Wild-derived Genes, Mitochondria, and Chromosomes in the Genetic Background of Mouse Models for Diseases and Biologic Functions (138-141)
Concluding Comments, John Strandberg (142-143)
Concluding Remarks, John Vandenbergh (144-146)
Appendix A (147-148)
Appendix B (149-150)