4.6 Article

Characterization of immune cell subtypes in three commonly used mouse strains reveals gender and strain-specific variations

Journal

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
Volume 99, Issue 1, Pages 93-106

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41374-018-0137-1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health [CA184770, AR060948]
  2. Department of Defense [PR141945]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The lack of consensus on bone marrow (BM) and splenic immune cell profiles in preclinical mouse strains complicates comparative analysis across different studies. Although studies have documented relative distribution of immune cells from peripheral blood in mice, similar studies for BM and spleen from naive mice are lacking. In an effort to establish strain and gender-specific benchmarks for distribution of various immune cell subtypes in these organs, we performed immunophenotypic analysis of BM cells and splenocytes from both genders of three commonly used murine strains (C57BL/6NCr, 129/SvHsd, and BALB/cAnNCr). Total neutrophils and splenic macrophages were significantly higher in C57BL/6NCr, whereas total B cells were lower. Within C57BL/6NCr female mice, BM B cells were elevated with respect to the males whereas splenic mDCs and splenic neutrophils were reduced. Within BALB/cAnNCr male mice, BM CD4(+ T)regs were elevated with respect to the other strains. Furthermore, in male BALB/cAnNCr mice, NK cells were elevated with respect to the other strains in both BM and spleen. Splenic CD4(+) Tregs and splenic CD8(+) T cells were reduced in male BALB/c mice in comparison to female mice. Bone marrow CD4(+) T cells and mDCs were significantly increased in 129/SvHsd whereas splenic CD8(+) T cells were reduced. In general, males exhibited higher immature myeloid cells, macrophages, and NK cells. To our knowledge, this study provides a first attempt to systematically establish organ-specific benchmarks on immune cells in studies involving these mouse strains.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available