4.8 Article

Laboratory mice born to wild mice have natural microbiota and model human immune responses

期刊

SCIENCE
卷 365, 期 6452, 页码 461-+

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.aaw4361

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK
  2. NCI
  3. NIAMS
  4. NIAID
  5. NIH DDIR's Innovation Award
  6. Swedish Research Council [2015-06376]
  7. Crohn's and Colitis Foundation
  8. European Molecular Biology Organization [ALTF1535-2014]
  9. ARC Foundation for Cancer Research
  10. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [HI 2088/1-1]
  11. NIH [DK113136, AI137157-01]
  12. Kenneth Rainin Foundation
  13. Crohn's and Colitis Foundation Senior Research Award
  14. Vinnova [2015-06376] Funding Source: Vinnova
  15. Swedish Research Council [2015-06376] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council
  16. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [ZIAAI001115, ZICAI001233] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  17. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [ZIADK054508] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laboratory mouse studies are paramount for understanding basic biological phenomena but also have limitations. These include conflicting results caused by divergent microbiota and limited translational research value. To address both shortcomings, we transferred C57BL/6 embryos into wild mice, creating wildlings. These mice have a natural microbiota and pathogens at all body sites and the tractable genetics of C57BL/6 mice. The bacterial microbiome, mycobiome, and virome of wildlings affect the immune landscape of multiple organs. Their gut microbiota outcompete laboratory microbiota and demonstrate resilience to environmental challenges. Wildlings, but not conventional laboratory mice, phenocopied human immune responses in two preclinical studies. A combined natural microbiota- and pathogen-based model may enhance the reproducibility of biomedical studies and increase the bench-to-bedside safety and success of immunological studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据