4.4 Review

Substrains matter in phenotyping of C57BL/6 mice

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS
Volume 70, Issue 2, Pages 145-160

Publisher

INT PRESS EDITING CENTRE INC
DOI: 10.1538/expanim.20-0158

Keywords

C57BL/6; genetic difference; phenotypic difference; single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP); substrain

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan [23700518]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23700518] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The C57BL/6 inbred mouse strain has diverged into two major groups, with over 20 substrains established globally. Recent research has shown phenotypic and genetic differences among C57BL/6 substrains in behavioral, neurological, cardiovascular, and metabolic traits, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate substrains based on study objectives.
The inbred mouse strain C57BL/6 has been widely used as a background strain for spontaneous and induced mutations. Developed in the 1930s, the C57BL/6 strain diverged into two major groups in the 1950s, namely, C57BL/6J and C57BL/6N, and more than 20 substrains have been established from them worldwide. We previously reported genetic differences among C57BL/6 substrains in 2009 and 2015. Since then, dozens of reports have been published on phenotypic differences in behavioral, neurological, cardiovascular, and metabolic traits. Substrains need to be chosen according to the purpose of the study because phenotypic differences might affect the experimental results. In this paper, we review recent reports of phenotypic and genetic differences among C57BL/6 substrains, focus our attention on the proper use of C57BL/6 and other inbred strains in the era of genome editing, and provide the life science research community wider knowledge about this subject.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available