| Title |
Novel insights into the genetic background of genetically modified mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Transgenic Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11248-018-0073-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Dobrowolski, Melina Fischer, Ronald Naumann |
| Abstract |
Unclear or misclassified genetic background of laboratory rodents or a lack of strain awareness causes a number of difficulties in performing or reproducing scientific experiments. Until now, genetic differentiation between strains and substrains of inbred mice has been a challenge. We have developed a screening method for analyzing inbred strains regarding their genetic background. It is based on 240 highly informative short tandem repeat (STR) markers covering the 19 autosomes as well as X and Y chromosomes. Combination of analysis results for presence of known C57BL/6 substrain-specific mutations together with autosomal STR markers and the Y-chromosomal STR-haplotype provides a comprehensive snapshot of the genetic background of mice. In this study, the genetic background of 72 mouse lines obtained from 18 scientific institutions in Germany and Austria was determined. By analyzing only 3 individuals per genetically modified line it was possible to detect mixed genetic backgrounds frequently. In several lines presence of a mispairing Y chromosome was detected. At least every second genetically modified line displayed a mixed genetic background which could lead to unexpected and non-reproducible results, irrespective of the investigated gene of interest. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 33% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 40% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2022.
All research outputs
#13,592,375
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Transgenic Research
#675
of 895 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,129
of 296,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transgenic Research
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 895 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.