4.5 Article

Forty mouse strain survey of water and sodium intake

Journal

PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR
Volume 91, Issue 5, Pages 620-631

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.03.025

Keywords

inbred strains; mouse phenome; two-bottle choice test; preference

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [S10 RR025607, S10 RR026752] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK058797, DK058797, R01 DK094759, R01 DK058797-08, DK46791, R01 DK046791, R01 DK046791-12] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We measured voluntary water and sodium intakes of 40 inbred strains of mice. Groups of similar to 10 males and similar to 10 females from each strain received a series of 48-h tests with a choice between a bottle of water and a bottle of one of the following: water, 25, 75, and 225 mM NaCl, 25, 75, and 225 sodium lactate. Sodium solution intakes were influenced by strain, sex, anion and concentration: Nine strains drank significantly more chloride than lactate, and only one strain (I/LnJ) drank significantly more lactate than chloride. The other 30 strains drank similar volumes of chloride and lactate. Sodium intakes were higher in females than males of 8 strains and did not differ by sex in the other 32 strains. Some strains had consistently high sodium intakes and preferred all sodium solutions to water (I 29S I/SvImJ, MA/MyJ, NZW/LacJ and SWR/J), some showed indifference (i.e. preferences not significantly different from 50%) to all concentrations tested (A/J, C57BL/6J, FVB/NJ and SEA/GnJ), and some had consistently low sodium intakes (AKR/J, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/10J, CBA/J, DBA/2J, I/LnJ, JF1/Ms, LP/J, NON/LtJ, PERA/EiJ, PL/J, and RIIIS/ J). The results illustrate the diversity of voluntary sodium intake in mice and will assist in the selection of appropriate strains for focused genetic and physiological analyses. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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