$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Environmental enrichment (EE) studies utilize complex housing parameters to affect social stimulation (large housing cages, larger groups of animals), cognitive stimulation (huts, tunnels, nesting materials, platforms) and physical activity (running wheels). EE has been utilized by many labs to understand the effects of increased activity and improved social and cognitive interactions on disease initiation and progression using a wide array of mouse models, including barbering induced alopecia, Alzheimer's disease, Rett syndrome, and several tumor and digestive disease models1,2,3,4,5,6.
Several mouse models have been developed to study colon tumorigenesis in mice. Perhaps the most well-defined model is the ApcMin mouse. The ApcMin mouse was developed in the laboratory of William Dove in 19907, and has been used as a mouse model of mutations in the APC gene that are commonly associated with human colorectal cancer. In contrast to humans harboring APC mutations, ApcMin mice primarily develop small intestinal tumors, with very rare occurrence of colon tumors. However, a Tcf4Het allele with a single knockin-knockout heterozygous mutation in Tcf4, vastly increases colon tumorigenesis when combined with the ApcMin allele8. Recently, this mouse model of colon tumorigenesis has been used to determine the effects of EE on colon tumorigenesis6. In the Bice et al. study, the physiological and phenotypic effects of EE on males and females of four different mouse lines (wild-type (WT), Tcf4Het/+ Apc+/+, Tcf4+/+ ApcMin/+, and Tcf4Het/+ApcMin/+)) were defined. Perhaps the most interesting finding was that EE significantly increases the lifespan of both male and female colon tumor-bearing animals. This demonstrated that EE may reduce at least some of the symptoms associated with colon tumorigenesis, and improve animal health. Remarkably, this improved lifespan in males is not a direct result of reduced tumorigenesis, and instead was linked to the initiation of a tumor wound healing response, including improved microbiome biodiversity6.
Several EE specific studies have been published with interesting results. However, from a technical standpoint, important results are often not translatable to other laboratories. Maintaining identical EE methodologies between different laboratories is an incredibly complex issue, not only due to enrichment devices and housing used, but also bedding, food, ventilation, breeding, genetics, activity in the room, and animal protocol requirements, among others9,10,11. One example is animal integration, where animals must be stably integrated into the mouse colony, therefore normalizing genetic background and diet composition, to avoid non-treatment related effects. Further, many EE studies have been completed prior to the realization of the importance of the microbiome in disease, and the way that common mouse husbandry practices can affect the composition of the gut microbiome10,12.
Breeding strategy and animal placement in EE can increase stress if not performed properly. Since EE studies utilize large numbers of both male and female animals and multiple genotypes, experimental setup can be difficult given the requirement for animals from several litters to be combined. Therefore, a breeding and weaning strategy was developed to allow for combining of weaned animals of the correct genotype from different litters. The primary rationale for this was to normalize the microbiota among litters and to reduce stress when animals were moved to the experimental environment. The microbiome was transmitted from the dam10. To provide microbial diversity to the colony, females were purchased from Jackson Labs and integrated into the colony for one month before the experiment began9,10,12. To further normalize microbiome biodiversity between animals, females were co-housed prior to breeding. Following breeding, communal housing during rearing and the ability to escape nursing pups improved the stress levels of maternal care13,14, possibly furthering microbiome normalization. To prevent non-EE related effects on the microbiome, this communal housing of all experimental animals prevented fighting and additional stress that occurred when combining several males from different litters into one experimental cage. Finally, equal numbers of animals of all genotypes were included in the cages. This provided the opportunity for improved microbiota biodiversity across genotypes, and removed the contribution of coprophagia (the animal's tendency to consume stool) or possible genotype-specific behavioral differences to the overall study.
This protocol provides a strategy that expands previous EE studies to include known aspects of microbiome research, including microbiota transmission and animal colony integration for microbiota normalization, to enable more uniform microbiome populations between experimental animals. Heeding these precautions is essential due to the ability of non-treatment related microbiota differences to confound study findings. Eliminating non-EE related microbiota changes will enable researchers to specifically define the role of EE on microbiota composition during disease development and progression.