Experimental Mice
Experimental Mice - Related Videos
10:38
Induction of Experimental Autoimmune Hypophysitis in SJL Mice
0 Views •
Cited by 4 •
2010
This video shows how to induce autoimmune hypophysitis in SJL mice and how to assess its severity by histopathology.
07:43
A Non-invasive and Technically Non-intensive Method for Induction and Phenotyping of Experimental Bacterial Pneumonia in Mice
0 Views •
Cited by 7 •
2016
Several methods have been described in the literature for modeling bacterial pneumonia in mice. Herein, we describe a non-invasive, inexpensive, rapid method for inducing pneumonia via aspiration (i.e., inhalation) of a bacterial inoculum pipetted into the oropharynx. Downstream methods for assessment of the pulmonary innate immune response are also detailed.
06:17
Measuring the Strength of Mice
0 Views •
Cited by 287 •
2013
Deficits in muscular strength occur in many clinical conditions such as motor neuron disease. The inverted screen and weight lifting tests described here measure strength in mice almost exclusively, with minimal influence of factors such as coordination.
08:47
Induction of Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis in Mice and Evaluation of the Disease-dependent Distribution of Immune Cells in Various Tissues
0 Views •
Cited by 36 •
2016
This manuscript describes the methods for induction and scoring of the experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) model, together with the assessment of immune cell distribution and mRNA cytokine levels in lymph nodes, spleen, blood and spinal cord using flow cytometry and quantitative PCR, respectively, at various disease phases.
10:12
Experimental Infection of Mice with the Parasitic Nematode Strongyloides ratti
0 Views •
Cited by 2 •
2025
Strongyloides ratti is a parasitic nematode that causes transient infections in laboratory mice, displaying tissue-migrating and intestinal life stages. Here, we present a protocol for the maintenance of the parasite cycle in rats and experimental infection of mice, including parasite quantification in the head, lung, and intestine.
FAQs
Behavioral outcomes in experimental mice can change with strain, age, housing, and other experimental conditions. These variables therefore function as important sources of biological variation or experimental confounding, meaning they may influence results independently of the factor under study. Controlling or documenting them helps researchers attribute differences in learning, anxiety, social interaction, or locomotion more accurately.
A behavioral phenotype becomes more informative when researchers connect it with genetic changes, neural circuits, or molecular pathways. An observed alteration in locomotion or memory can serve as an entry point for asking which biological level is associated with that change. This multilevel interpretation moves beyond describing behavior and supports investigation of mechanisms underlying normal or altered function.
The value of a mouse behavioral result depends partly on how the comparison is framed. Studies may examine normal function, disease-related changes, or responses to a treatment, but these purposes answer different questions about the same observable behavior. Results can inform biological research without automatically predicting human behavior, so translation requires careful interpretation of the model’s limits.
A behavioral study generally begins by selecting a standardized assay that matches the process being investigated, such as learning, memory, anxiety, social interaction, or locomotion. Researchers then assess the mice under controlled experimental conditions and compare the resulting behavioral measures with the study’s biological or treatment variables. Standardization improves consistency and makes differences easier to interpret.
These features can affect behavioral measurements before a treatment or genetic change is considered. Strain may be relevant to the biological background, while age and housing represent characteristics of the animals or experimental setting. Treating such factors as controlled or documented variables reduces ambiguity and helps distinguish a target effect from differences in baseline behavior.
Changes in measured behavior can provide evidence about whether an intervention is associated with altered learning, memory, anxiety, social interaction, or locomotion. Researchers can relate those outcomes to disease-related changes or candidate biological mechanisms, including neural circuits and molecular pathways. The results support evaluation of potential interventions while remaining subject to careful interpretation before conclusions are applied to humans.