Mouse reproductive fitness is maintained up to an ambient temperature of 28℃ when housed in individually-ventilated cages

Helppi, Jussi; Schreier, Dora; Naumann, Ronald; Zierau, Oliver

doi:10.1177/0023677215611564

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Uncited by Fischer et al. [1], we note that studies in multiple mouse strains confirm that housing mice at 30 °C is severely detrimental to their reproductive performance compared to those housed at cooler temperatures [31], [32], [33], [34], [35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

What is the best housing temperature to translate mouse experiments to humans?

Keijer

Speakman

2019

Molecular Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Ambient temperature impinges on energy metabolism in a body size dependent manner. This has implications for the housing temperature at which mice are best compared to humans. In 2013, we suggested that, for comparative studies, solitary mice are best housed at 23–25 °C, because this is 3–5 °C below the mouse thermoneutral zone and humans routinely live 3–5 °C below thermoneutrality, and because this generates a ratio of DEE to BMR of 1.6–1.9, mimicking the ratio found in free-living humans. Methods Recently, Fischer et al. (2017) challenged this estimate. By studying mice at 21 °C and at 30 °C (but notably not at 23–25 °C) they concluded that 30 °C is the optimal housing temperature. Here, we measured energy metabolism of C57BL/6 mice over a range of temperatures, between 21.4 °C and 30.2 °C. Results We observed a ratio of DEE to BMR of 1.7 at 27.6 °C and of 1.8 at 25.5 °C, suggesting that this is the best temperature range for housing C57BL/6 mice to mimic human thermal relations. We used a 24 min average to calculate the ratio, similar to that used in human studies, while the ratio calculated by Fisher et al. dependent on short, transient metabolic declines. Conclusion We concur with Fisher et al. and others that 21 °C is too cool, but we continue to suggest that 30 °C is too warm. We support this with other data. Finally, to mimic living environments of all humans, and not just those in controlled Western environments, mouse experimentation at various temperatures is likely required.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

What is the best housing temperature to translate mouse experiments to humans?

Keijer

Speakman

2019

Molecular Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternative to lowering ambient temperature conditions, shaving female mice and offering them chilled drinking water helped to increase milk production and juvenile growth rate (Marai et al 2001 ; Król et al 2007 ; Valencak et al 2013 ). Many authors argue that animals kept in the laboratory should be held at thermo-neutral conditions, ranging around 30 °C for most laboratory rodents (Hylander and Repasky 2016 ; Helppi et al 2016 ). Careful re-considerations on the temperature requirements of lactating females therefore may improve the well-being of the mothers in accordance of the 3 R’s in laboratory animal research (Russell and Burch 1959 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dorsal shaving affects concentrations of faecal cortisol metabolites in lactating golden hamsters

Ohrnberger

Brinkmann

Palme

et al. 2018

Sci Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breeding of golden hamsters is classically performed at thermal conditions ranging from 20 to 24 °C. However, growing evidence suggests that lactating females suffer from heat stress. We hypothesised that shaving females dorsally to maximise heat dissipation may reduce stress during reproduction. We thus compared faecal cortisol metabolites (FCM) from shaved golden hamster mothers with those from unshaved controls. We observed significantly lower FCM levels in the shaved mothers (F1,22 = 8.69, p = 0.0075) pointing to lower stress due to ameliorated heat dissipation over the body surface. In addition, we observed 0.4 °C lower mean subcutaneous body temperatures in the shaved females, although this effect did not reach significance (F1,22 = 1.86, p = 0.18). Our results suggest that golden hamsters having body masses being more than four times that of laboratory mice provide a very interesting model to study aspects of lactation and heat production at the same time.

show abstract

“…While a mildly cool room temperature helps to maintain the thermal comfort of animal care workers, it is also thought to be beneficial for mouse husbandry because it results in increased litter size and viability [15]. However, it was recently published that mouse reproductive fitness is actually maintained even when they are housed up to 28 8C [24]. What is not generally appreciated is the fact that the Guide states in several different places that variations in these microenvironmental housing factors could affect behavior, physiology (reproduction), phenotype and, possibly, experimental outcomes.…”

Section: Glossarymentioning

confidence: 99%