Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination

ABSTRACTSpecific pathogen-free (SPF) laboratory mice dominate preclinical studies for immunology and vaccinology. Unfortunately, SPF mice often fail to accurately model human responses to vaccination and other immunological perturbations. Several groups have taken different approaches to introduce a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Autumn E. Sanders, Henriette Arnesen, Frances K. Shepherd, Dira S. Putri, Jessica K. Fiege, Mark J. Pierson, Shanley N. Roach, Harald Carlsen, David Masopust, Preben Boysen, Ryan A. Langlois
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: American Society for Microbiology 2024-02-01
Series:mSphere
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/msphere.00654-23
_version_ 1797292557511688192
author Autumn E. Sanders
Henriette Arnesen
Frances K. Shepherd
Dira S. Putri
Jessica K. Fiege
Mark J. Pierson
Shanley N. Roach
Harald Carlsen
David Masopust
Preben Boysen
Ryan A. Langlois
author_facet Autumn E. Sanders
Henriette Arnesen
Frances K. Shepherd
Dira S. Putri
Jessica K. Fiege
Mark J. Pierson
Shanley N. Roach
Harald Carlsen
David Masopust
Preben Boysen
Ryan A. Langlois
author_sort Autumn E. Sanders
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACTSpecific pathogen-free (SPF) laboratory mice dominate preclinical studies for immunology and vaccinology. Unfortunately, SPF mice often fail to accurately model human responses to vaccination and other immunological perturbations. Several groups have taken different approaches to introduce additional microbial experience to SPF mice to better model human immune experience. How these different models compare is unknown. Here, we directly compare three models: housing SPF mice in a microbe-rich barn-like environment (feralizing), adding wild-caught mice to the barn-like environment (fer-cohoused), or cohousing SPF mice with pet store mice in a barrier facility (pet-cohoused); the two latter representing different murine sources of microbial transmission. Pet-cohousing mice resulted in the greatest microbial exposure. Feralizing alone did not result in the transmission of any pathogens tested, while fer-cohousing resulted in the transmission of several picornaviruses. Murine astrovirus 2, the most common pathogen from pet store mice, was absent from the other two model systems. Previously, we had shown that pet-cohousing reduced the antibody response to vaccination compared with SPF mice. This was not recapitulated in either the feralized or fer-cohoused mice. These data indicate that not all dirty mouse models are equivalent in either microbial experience or immune responses to vaccination. These disparities suggest that more cross model comparisons are needed but also represent opportunities to uncover microbe combination-specific phenotypes and develop more refined experimental models. Given the breadth of microbes encountered by humans across the globe, multiple model systems may be needed to accurately recapitulate heterogenous human immune responses.IMPORTANCEAnimal models are an essential tool for evaluating clinical interventions. Unfortunately, they can often fail to accurately predict outcomes when translated into humans. This failure is due in part to a lack of natural infections experienced by most laboratory animals. To improve the mouse model, we and others have exposed laboratory mice to microbes they would experience in the wild. Although these models have been growing in popularity, these different models have not been specifically compared. Here, we directly compare how three different models of microbial experience impact the immune response to influenza vaccination. We find that these models are not the same and that the degree of microbial exposure affects the magnitude of the response to vaccination. These results provide an opportunity for the field to continue comparing and contrasting these systems to determine which models best recapitulate different aspects of the human condition.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T19:58:10Z
format Article
id doaj.art-87adcac41ea74783bc1ecd64e40dff96
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2379-5042
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T19:58:10Z
publishDate 2024-02-01
publisher American Society for Microbiology
record_format Article
series mSphere
spelling doaj.art-87adcac41ea74783bc1ecd64e40dff962024-02-28T14:07:38ZengAmerican Society for MicrobiologymSphere2379-50422024-02-019210.1128/msphere.00654-23Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccinationAutumn E. Sanders0Henriette Arnesen1Frances K. Shepherd2Dira S. Putri3Jessica K. Fiege4Mark J. Pierson5Shanley N. Roach6Harald Carlsen7David Masopust8Preben Boysen9Ryan A. Langlois10Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USAFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, NorwayDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USADepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USADepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USACenter for Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USADepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USAFaculty of Chemistry, Biotechnology and Food Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, NorwayDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USAFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, NorwayDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USAABSTRACTSpecific pathogen-free (SPF) laboratory mice dominate preclinical studies for immunology and vaccinology. Unfortunately, SPF mice often fail to accurately model human responses to vaccination and other immunological perturbations. Several groups have taken different approaches to introduce additional microbial experience to SPF mice to better model human immune experience. How these different models compare is unknown. Here, we directly compare three models: housing SPF mice in a microbe-rich barn-like environment (feralizing), adding wild-caught mice to the barn-like environment (fer-cohoused), or cohousing SPF mice with pet store mice in a barrier facility (pet-cohoused); the two latter representing different murine sources of microbial transmission. Pet-cohousing mice resulted in the greatest microbial exposure. Feralizing alone did not result in the transmission of any pathogens tested, while fer-cohousing resulted in the transmission of several picornaviruses. Murine astrovirus 2, the most common pathogen from pet store mice, was absent from the other two model systems. Previously, we had shown that pet-cohousing reduced the antibody response to vaccination compared with SPF mice. This was not recapitulated in either the feralized or fer-cohoused mice. These data indicate that not all dirty mouse models are equivalent in either microbial experience or immune responses to vaccination. These disparities suggest that more cross model comparisons are needed but also represent opportunities to uncover microbe combination-specific phenotypes and develop more refined experimental models. Given the breadth of microbes encountered by humans across the globe, multiple model systems may be needed to accurately recapitulate heterogenous human immune responses.IMPORTANCEAnimal models are an essential tool for evaluating clinical interventions. Unfortunately, they can often fail to accurately predict outcomes when translated into humans. This failure is due in part to a lack of natural infections experienced by most laboratory animals. To improve the mouse model, we and others have exposed laboratory mice to microbes they would experience in the wild. Although these models have been growing in popularity, these different models have not been specifically compared. Here, we directly compare how three different models of microbial experience impact the immune response to influenza vaccination. We find that these models are not the same and that the degree of microbial exposure affects the magnitude of the response to vaccination. These results provide an opportunity for the field to continue comparing and contrasting these systems to determine which models best recapitulate different aspects of the human condition.https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/msphere.00654-23mouse modelsvaccinesnatural mouse virusespreclinical models
spellingShingle Autumn E. Sanders
Henriette Arnesen
Frances K. Shepherd
Dira S. Putri
Jessica K. Fiege
Mark J. Pierson
Shanley N. Roach
Harald Carlsen
David Masopust
Preben Boysen
Ryan A. Langlois
Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
mSphere
mouse models
vaccines
natural mouse viruses
preclinical models
title Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
title_full Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
title_fullStr Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
title_short Comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
title_sort comparison of mouse models of microbial experience reveals differences in microbial diversity and response to vaccination
topic mouse models
vaccines
natural mouse viruses
preclinical models
url https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/msphere.00654-23
work_keys_str_mv AT autumnesanders comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT henriettearnesen comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT franceskshepherd comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT dirasputri comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT jessicakfiege comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT markjpierson comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT shanleynroach comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT haraldcarlsen comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT davidmasopust comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT prebenboysen comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination
AT ryanalanglois comparisonofmousemodelsofmicrobialexperiencerevealsdifferencesinmicrobialdiversityandresponsetovaccination