MIA induction at different time windows perturbs different brain development events in rodents, and consequently leads to different behavioral abnormalities and neuropathologies in the offspring. Here, we described a protocol to induce MIA in mice with poly(I:C) injection at E12.5. This method of MIA induction leads to behavioral, neurological, immunological, and gastrointestinal abnormalities associated with autism and schizophrenia in the offspring8,10,11,16. It is important to note that, because MIA is an environmental risk factor, the phenotype of the offspring is expected to have higher variation than that of mice from genetic models of neurodevelopmental disorders. Thus, to accurately and consistently generate autism and schizophrenia-related phenotypes through MIA, it is especially important to minimize additional variables that may confound the results.
The timeline described in the protocol should be followed closely. Correct injection time window would ensure that MIA perturbs the offspring brain development at the desired stage. Induction of MIA at E12.5 in mouse corresponds to perturbations near the end of the first trimester in human gestation21- a period during which significant brain development occurs, including development of Purkinje cells and caudate putamen, and neurogenesis in the cortical layer. Further investigation will be needed to prove the association between the loss of Purkinje cells in MIA cerebellum and the early perturbation of brain development.
While consistent treatment, examination, and even husbandry of the dams would minimize the effect of maternal stress on the offspring phenotype, our protocol still contains caveats that researchers should be aware of. For example, we single house the dams the day before the injection of poly(I:C) and throughout the rest of pregnancy. Our strategy is to leave the pregnant mice in an undisturbed environment. However, this action could induce stress response in the maternal environment. Although we do not know whether this isolation-induced stress response interferes with the development of the offspring, the MIA effect can be observed by following our procedure.
In addition, the strain and genetic background of the mice needs to be chosen and tested carefully for MIA induction. So far, the effect of MIA is mostly replicated in wild-type C57BL/6N mice8,10,13,16. Others have also observed the MIA effect in BTBR mouse strain19. It has been shown that poly(I:C) could elicit different immune responses in genetically engineered mice13,22-24, which may introduce additional confounding effects to the offspring.
In terms of the number of biological replicates, we use at least 6 litters per group for behavioral or physiological assays and 3 litters per group for gene expression, protein, or immunohistochemistry approaches. We test all offspring within a litter instead of using one or two offspring within a litter to avoid experimental bias. We also average the data for all offspring within a litter, and use that average as one data point (such that n = the number of litters) to avoid inappropriate statistics13. The data from each gender are also pooled because no obvious gender difference has been observed in the MIA model13.
The rationale behind gauging MIA offspring by litter size is to minimize the variation caused by maternal nursing and caring. Litter size has been shown to correlate with stereotypic behaviors in C57BL/6 mice25. We speculate that this could be due to the assignment of resources during maternal nursing and caring. To avoid this confounding effect, our standard desired litter size is 6-10 for C57BL/6 mice.
Even when following the protocol closely, the experimenter may encounter an overly weak or excessively potent immune response in pregnant mice after poly(I:C) injection. To avoid this, it is essential to validate the pyrogenic and cytokinogenic activity of different batches of poly(I:C). Different batches and lots of poly(I:C) from the same company could lead to different levels of inflammatory response in mice; strikingly, injecting identical doses of poly(I:C) from different batches can result in up to 10 fold differences in plasma IL-6 levels26. Determining the dosage and batch of poly(I:C) for further MIA experiment by the readout of non-pregnant female IL-6 measurement could help reduce the variation of effect from MIA induction.
If it is necessary to modify the dosage for specific batches of poly(I:C), it is also important to modify the concentration of the poly(I:C) solution for injection such that the volume injected remains roughly 5 µl per gram of mouse weight. For example, according to the manufacturer's procedure, poly(I:C) is supposedly reconstituted at ~10 mg/ml of water to yield a polynucleotide in physiological phosphate buffered solution. Compared to our 40 mg/ml solution, the lower concentration would increase the volume of injection by 4 folds. For pregnant mice, a large volume of buffer injection could potentially increase the pressure on the embryos and introduce undesired, confounding effects to the offspring. Therefore, we choose to dissolve poly(I:C) powder in 0.09% sodium chloride with a higher final concentration in order to reduce the volume of injection.
IL-6 is chosen to be the marker of acute inflammatory response because prior research has identified IL-6 signaling as a critical factor in mediating the effects of MIA on brain development and behavior. Following poly(I:C) treatment, IL-6 is the most upregulated cytokine in maternal blood and placenta10,12. Most importantly, Smith et al. demonstrated that of several highly upregulated cytokines, only IL-6 exhibited both necessity and sufficiency for induction of MIA-associated brain and behavioral abnormalities. That is, maternal injection of anti-IL-6 could effectively prevent abnormal behavioral and transcriptomic abnormalities in MIA offspring, while neutralizing other cytokines did not10. Moreover, maternal injection of recombinant IL-6 alone (without poly(I:C)) reproduces MIA-associated transcriptional and behavioral abnormalities seen in the MIA fetal brain and offspring12,15.
Compared to other methods to induce MIA (e.g., lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or influenza), poly(I:C) is relatively safe and provides an easy way to control the intensity of the immune response. Although the inflammatory response elicited by maternal poly(I:C) administration is acute and transient, its effect on the offspring behaviors and brain development is profound. Overall, once the technique of inducing MIA through poly(I:C) injection at E12.5 is mastered, one can then proceed to perform different behavioral and biological assays to examine the effect of this environmental risk factor on the offspring. At the same time, one could also combine the method with genetic modifications or other treatments before, during, or after pregnancy to investigate the causes and possible therapeutic approaches to autism and schizophrenia.