4.5 Article

Differential effect of inbred mouse strain (C57BL/6, DBA/2, 129T2) on insulin secretory function in response to a high fat diet

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 187, Issue 1, Pages 45-53

Publisher

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1677/joe.1.06333

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK-17047] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The increasing production of genetically-modified mouse models has necessitated studies to determine the inherent physiological characteristics of commonly used mouse strains. In this study we examined insulin secretory function in response to an intravenous bolus of glucose or glucose plus arginine in anesthetized C57BL/6, DBA/2 and 129T2 mice fed either a control or high fat diet for 6 weeks. The results show that 129T2 mice had higher fasting plasma glucose levels and lower fasting plasma insulin levels compared with C57BL/6 and DBA/2 mice regardless of diet. Furthermore, 129T2 mice were glucose intolerant and secreted significantly less insulin in response to glucose and glucose plus arginine irrespective of diet compared with the other two strains of mice. DBA/2 mice hypersecreted insulin in response to glucose and glucose plus arginine compared with C57BL/6 and 129T2 mice. Moreover while first phase insulin secretion was appropriately increased in response to the high fat diet in C57BL/6 and 129T2 mice, this was not the case for DBA/2 mice. Mean islet area was decreased in response to a high fat diet in DBA/2 mice, while there was no dietary effect on the other two strains. This study highlights the inherent genetic differences that exist among seemingly normal strains of mice that are commonly used to make transgenic and knockout mice. Understanding these differences will provide researchers with the information to choose the appropriate genetic background on which to express their particular genetic alteration.

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