Microsatellite Marker Analysis for Laboratory Mice Profiling

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Reza Ahangari Cohan 1
Davoud Nouri Inanlou 2
Mohammad Hasan Samiee Aref 3
Sirous Zeinali 4
Ramin Farhoudi 2
1 Department of Nanobiotechnology, New Technologies Research Group, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Quality Control, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Biotechnology, College of Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
4 Department of Molecular Medicine, Pasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Background: The key point in the production procedure of inbred animals is checking the genetic purity. Skin grafting and coat color test are used traditionally to prove genetic purity, but they have some disadvantages. Recent advances in DNA profiling have enabled scientists to check easily the genetic purity of laboratory animals. In the current study, a set of microsatellite markers was designed to check the purity of inbred laboratory mice. Materials and Methods: Twenty microsatellites located on 20 chromosomes were employed to create a distinctive genetic profile for parentage analysis. Each individual primer was designed based on distinguishable colors and separable sizes. Results: Twenty specific microsatellite markers were used in the polymerase chain reaction mixture to identify inbred BALB/cJ strains. Our results confirmed that the designed microsatellites are excellent genetic markers for testing inbred BALB/cJ strain in laboratories. Conclusion: Our study showed that genetic profiling using microsatellite markers allows us to detect the genetic differences of laboratory mouse species in quality control tests and validation steps.

Keywords

1.
Mishra S. Does modern medicine increase life-expectancy: Quest for the moon rabbit? Indian Heart J 2016;68:19-27.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Franco NH. Animal experiments in biomedical research: A historical perspective. Animals (Basel) 2013;3:238-73.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Lambert R. Breeding strategies for maintaining colonies of laboratory mice. A Jackson Laboratory Resource Manual, Bar Harbor, ME 04609 USA, The Jackson Laboratory, 2007;1-25.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Festing MF. Evidence should trump intuition by preferring inbred strains to outbred stocks in preclinical research. ILAR J 2014;55:399-404.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Lacy RC. Importance of genetic variation to the viability of mammalian populations. J Mammal 1997;78:320-35.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Flurkey K, Currer JM, Leiter EH, Witham B. The Jackson Laboratory Handbook on Genetically Standardized Mice, Sixth Edition, Bar Harbor, ME 04609 USA, The Jackson Laboratory; 2009;1-363.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Vieira ML, Santini L, Diniz AL, Munhoz Cde F. Microsatellite markers: What they mean and why they are so useful. Genet Mol Biol 2016;39:312-28.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Montaldo HH, Meza-Herrera CA. Use of molecular markers and major genes in the genetic improvement of livestock. Electron J Biotechnol 1998;1:15-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, Nusbaum C, Zody MC, Baldwin J,et al. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 2001;409:860-921.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Vahab Saadi A, Kushtagi P, Gopinath P, Satyamoorthy K. Quantitative fluorescence polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal aneuploidies. Int J Hum Genet 2010;10:121-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Rebelato AB, Caetano AR. Runs of homozygosity for autozygosity estimation and genomic analysis in production animals. Pesquisa Agropecuária Bras 2018;53:975-84.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, Porritt MJ, Rewell S, O'Collins V,et al. Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000245.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Brenner S, Miller JH, Broughton W. Encyclopedia of Genetics. Copyright© 2001 Elsevier Science Inc. ISBN: 978-0-12-227080-2.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Ząbek T, Fornal A. Evaluation of the 17-plex STR kit for parentage testing of polish Coldblood and Hucul horses. Ann. Anim. Sci., 2009; 9 (4):363–372.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Seyedabadi H, Amirinia C, Banabazi MH, Emrani H. Parentage verification of Iranian Caspian horse using microsatellites markers. Iran J Biotechnol 2006;4:260-4.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Choi SK, Cho CY, Yeon SH, Cho BW, Cho GJ. Genetic characterization and polymorphisms for parentage testing of the Jeju horse using 20 microsatellite loci. J Vet Med Sci 2008;70:1111-5.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Takasu M, Hiramatsu N, Tozaki T, Kakoi H, Nakagawa T, Hasegawa T, et al. Genetic characterization of endangered Kiso horse using 31 microsatellite DNAs. J Vet Med Sci. 2011; 74 (2):161-6.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Moshkelani S, Rabiee S, Javaheri-Koupaei MJ. DNA fingerprinting of Iranian Arab horse using fourteen microsatellites marker. Research Journal of Biological Sciences 2011;6:402-5.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Luis C, Cothran E, Oom M. Microsatellites in Portuguese autochthonous horse breeds: Usefulness for parentage testing. Genet Mol Biol 2002;25:131-4.  Back to cited text no. 19
Advanced Biomedical Research
Volume 2019, june
June 2019
Pages 1-7