4.5 Article

How informative is the mouse for human gut microbiota research?

Journal

DISEASE MODELS & MECHANISMS
Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages 1-16

Publisher

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dmm.017400

Keywords

Gut microbiota; Humanized mouse models; Mouse core gut microbiota; Mouse models; Mouse pan-gut microbiota

Funding

  1. VIB international PhD program
  2. Marie Curie Actions FP7 People COFUND [267139]
  3. KU Leuven
  4. REGA Institute
  5. Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders (FWO)
  6. Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT)
  7. FP7 MetaCardis project [HEALTH-F4-2012-305312]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The microbiota of the human gut is gaining broad attention owing to its association with a wide range of diseases, ranging from metabolic disorders (e. g. obesity and type 2 diabetes) to autoimmune diseases (such as inflammatory bowel disease and type 1 diabetes), cancer and even neurodevelopmental disorders (e. g. autism). Having been increasingly used in biomedical research, mice have become the model of choice for most studies in this emerging field. Mouse models allow perturbations in gut microbiota to be studied in a controlled experimental setup, and thus help in assessing causality of the complex host-microbiota interactions and in developing mechanistic hypotheses. However, pitfalls should be considered when translating gut microbiome research results from mouse models to humans. In this Special Article, we discuss the intrinsic similarities and differences that exist between the two systems, and compare the human and murine core gut microbiota based on a meta-analysis of currently available datasets. Finally, we discuss the external factors that influence the capability of mouse models to recapitulate the gut microbiota shifts associated with human diseases, and investigate which alternative model systems exist for gut microbiota research.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available