Wild mice: An ever-increasing contribution to a popular mammalian model

Trends in Genetics

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 24-31

  Guénet, Jean Louis ^a   Bonhomme, François ^b  

^a INSTITUT PASTEUR   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL MODEL; BEHAVIOR GENETICS; CHROMOSOME VARIANT; CROSS BREEDING; DNA HYBRIDIZATION; EVOLUTION; GENE INTERACTION; GENE MAPPING; GENE MUTATION; GENE STRUCTURE; GENETIC POLYMORPHISM; GENOMICS; GENOTYPE PHENOTYPE CORRELATION; INFERTILITY; MOUSE STRAIN; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; WILD TYPE;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CHROMOSOMES; EPISTASIS, GENETIC; EVOLUTION; MICE; MICE, INBRED STRAINS; PHYLOGENY; POLYMORPHISM, GENETIC; VARIATION (GENETICS);

ANIMALIA; MAMMALIA; MUS;

EID: 0037213794     PISSN: 01689525     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-9525(02)00007-0     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. Simon G.G., et al. A physical map of the mouse genome. Nature. 418:2002;743-750.
2. Beck J.A., et al. Genealogies of mouse inbred strains. Nat. Genet. 24:2000;23-25.
3. Yonekawa H. Relationship between laboratory mice and the subspecies Mus musculus domesticus based on restriction endonuclease cleavage patterns of mitochondrial DNA. Jpn. J. Genet. 55:1980;289-296.
4. Ferris S.D., et al. Evidence from mtDNA sequences that common laboratory strains of inbred mice are descended from a single female. Nature. 295:1982;163-165.
5. Bonhomme F., et al. The polyphyletic origin of laboratory inbred mice and their rate of evolution. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 30:1987;51-58.
6. West J.D., et al. Development of interspecific hybrids of Mus. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 41:1977;233-243.
7. She J.X., et al. Molecular phylogenies in the genus Mus: comparative analysis of electrophoretic scnDNA hybridization and mtDNA RFLP data. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 41:1990;83-103.
8. Chevret P., et al. Evolutionary systematics of the Indian mouse Mus famulus Bonhote 198: molecular (DNA/DNA hybridization and 12S rRNA sequences) and morphological evidences. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 2002;. in press.
9. Lundrigan B.L., et al. Phylogenetic relationships in the genus Mus, based on paternally, maternally, and biparentally inherited characters. Syst. Biol. 51:2002;410-431.
10. Sharma T. Chromosomal and molecular divergence in the Indian pygmy field mice Mus booduga-terricolor lineage of the subgenus Mus. Genetica. 97:1996;331-338.
11. Auffray J.C., et al. Phylogenetic position and description of a new species of subgenus Mus (Rodentia Mammalia) from Thailand. Zoologia Scripta. 2002;. in press.
12. Auffray J., et al. The house mouse progression in Eurasia: a paleontological and archeological approach. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 41:1990;13-25.
13. Yonekawa H., et al. Hybrid origin of Japanese mice Mus musculus molossinus: evidence from restriction analysis of mitochondrial DNA. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:1988;63-78.
14. Din W., et al. Origin and radiation of the house mouse: clues from nuclear genes. J. Evol. Biol. 9:1996;519-539.
15. Boursot P., et al. The evolution of house mice. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24:1993;119-152.
16. Sage R.D., et al. House mice as models in systematic biology. Syst. Biol. 42:1993;523-561.
17. Yonekawa H.S., et al. Genetics diversity and geographic distribution of Mus musculus subspecies based on the polymorphism of mitochondrial DNA. Moriwaki K., et al. Genetics in Wild Mice. 1994;25-40 Jpn. Sci. Soc. Press.
18. Prager E.M., et al. Genetic variation and phylogeography of central Asian and other house mice, including a major new mitochondrial lineage in Yemen. Genetics. 150:1998;835-861.
19. Duplantier J.-M., et al. Evidence for a mitochondrial lineage originating from the Arabian peninsula in Madagascar house mouse (Mus musculus). Heredity. 89:2002;154-158.
20. Marshall J.T. Systematics of the genus Mus. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 127:1986;12-18.
21. Orth A., et al. Hybridation naturelle entre deux espèces sympatriques de souris: M. musculus domesticus et M. spretus Lataste. C. R. Biol. 325:2002;89-97.
22. Greene-Till R., et al. Gene flow of unique sequences between Mus musculus domesticus and Mus spretus. Mamm. Genome. 11:2000;225-230.
23. Qi C.F., et al. Molecular phylogeny of Fv1. Mamm. Genome. 9:1998;1049-1055.
24. Karn R.C., et al. The complex history of a gene proposed to participate in a sexual isolation mechanism in house mice. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:2002;462-471.
25. Bonhomme F., Guénet J.-L. The laboratory mouse and its wild relatives. Lyon M.F. Genetic Variants and Strains of the Laboratory Mouse. 1996;1577-1596 Oxford University Press.
26. Bonhomme F., et al. Biochemical diversity and evolution in the genus Mus. Biochem. Genet. 22:1984;275-303.
27. Lewis S.E., et al. ENU mutagenesis in the mouse electrophoretic specific-locus test, 1. dose-response relationship of electrophoretically-detected mutations arising from mouse spermatogonia treated with ethylnitrosourea. Mutat. Res. 249:1991;311-315.
28. Bulfield G., Kacser H. Histidinaemia in mouse and man. Arch. Dis. Child. 49:1974;545-552.
29. Bierwolf D. Die Embryogenese des hydrocephalus und der kleinhirnmissbildungen beim dreherstamm der Hausmaus. Morph. Jahr. 99:1958;542-612.
30. Bennett D. The t-locus of the mouse. Cell. 6:1975;4411-4454.
31. Silver L.M. The peculiar journey of a selfish chromosome: mouse t-haplotypes and meiotic drive. Trends Genet. 9:1993;250-254.
32. Herrmann B.G., et al. A protein kinase encoded by the t-complex responder gene causes non-mendelian inheritance. Nature. 402:1999;141-146.
33. Botstein D., et al. Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 32:1980;314-331.
34. Robert B., et al. Investigation of genetic linkage between myosin and actin genes using an interspecific mouse backcross. Nature. 314:1985;181-183.
35. Guénet J.-L. The contribution of wild derived mouse inbred strains to gene mapping methodology. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 127:1986;109-113.
36. Breen M., et al. Towards high resolution maps of the mouse and human genomes - a facility for ordering markers to 0.1 cM resolution. Hum. Mol. Genet. 3:1994;621-627.
37. Flint J., Mott R. Finding the molecular basis of quantitative traits: successes and pitfalls. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2:2001;437-445.
38. Matin A., Nadeau J.H. Sensitized polygenic trait analysis. Trends Genet. 17:2001;727-731.
39. Deltour L., et al. Tissue- and developmental stage-specific imprinting of the mouse proinsulin gene, Ins2. Dev. Biol. 168:1995;686-688.
40. Payseur B.A., et al. Searching for evidence of positive selection in the human genome using patterns of microsatellite variability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:2002;1143-1153.
41. Gropp A., Winking H. Robertsonian translocations: cytology, meiosis, segregation patterns and biological consequences of heterozygosity. Symp. Zool. Soc. London. 47:1981;141-181.
42. Nachman M.W., Searle J.B. Why is the house mouse karyotype so variable? Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:1995;462-471.
43. Epstein C.J. The Consequences of Chromosome Imbalance: Principle, Mechanisms and Models. 1986;Cambridge University Press.
44. Akeson E.C., et al. Ts65Dn - localization of the translocation breakpoint and trisomic gene content in a mouse model for down syndrome. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 93:2001;270-276.
45. Cattanach B.M., Beechey C.V. Genomic imprinting in the mouse: possible final analysis. Reik W., Surani A. Genomic Imprinting: Frontiers in Molecular Biology. 1997;118-145 Oxford University Press.
46. Oakey R.J., Beechey C.V. Imprinted genes: identification by chromosome rearrangements and post-genomic strategies. Trends Genet. 18:2002;359-366.
47. Coviello-McLaughlin G.M., Prowse K.R. Telomere length regulation during postnatal development and ageing in Mus spretus. Nucleic Acids Res. 25:1997;3051-3058.
48. Zhu L., et al. Telomere length regulation in mice is linked to a novel chromosome locus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 95:1998;8648-8653.
49. Haller O., et al. Mx proteins: mediators of innate resistance to RNA viruses. Rev. Sci. Tech. 17:1998;220-230.
50. Sangster M.Y., et al. Genetically determined resistance to flavivirus infection in wild Mus musculus domesticus and other taxonomic groups in the Mus genus. Arch. Virol. 143:1998;697-715.
51. Sebastiani G., et al. Cloning and characterization of the murine toll-like receptor 5 (Tlr5) gene: sequence and mRNA expression studies in Salmonella-susceptible MOLF/Ei mice. Genomics. 64:2000;230-240.
52. Lengeling A., et al. The battle of two genomes: genetics of bacterial host/pathogen interactions in mice. Mamm. Genome. 12:2001;261-271.
53. Gardner B., et al. The Lake Casitas wild mouse: evolving genetic resistance to retroviral disease. Trends Genet. 7:1991;22-27.
54. Lyu M.S., et al. Receptor-mediated interference mechanism responsible for resistance to polytropic leukemia viruses in Mus castaneus. J. Virol. 73:1999;3733-3736.
55. Nagase H., et al. Epistatic interactions between skin tumor modifier loci in interspecific (spretus/musculus) backcross mice. Cancer Res. 61:2001;1305-1308.
56. Santos J., et al. A new locus for resistance to γ-radiation-induced thymic lymphoma identified using inter-specific consomic and inter-specific recombinant congenic strains of mice. Oncogene. 21:2002;6680-6683.
57. Bucan M., Abel T. The mouse: genetics meets behaviour. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3:2002;114-123.
58. Koide T., et al. Multi-phenotype behavioral characterization of inbred strains derived from wild stocks of Mus musculus. Mamm. Genome. 11:2000;664-670.
59. Guénet J.-L., et al. Hst-3: an X-linked hybrid sterility gene. Genet. Res. 56:1990;163-165.
60. Forejt J. Hybrid sterility in the mouse. Trends Genet. 12:1996;412-417.
61. Pilder S.H., et al. Hst7: a male sterility mutation perturbing sperm motility, flagellar assembly, and mitochondrial sheath differentiation. J. Androl. 18:1997;663-671.
62. Elliott R.W., et al. Genetic analysis of testis weight and fertility in an interspecies hybrid congenic strain for chromosome X. Mamm. Genome. 12:2001;45-51.
63. Turelli M., Orr H.A. Dominance, epistasis and the genetics of postzygotic isolation. Genetics. 154:2000;1663-1679.
64. Montagutelli X., et al. Epistatic control of non-mendelian inheritance in mouse interspecific crosses. Genetics. 143:1996;1739-1752.
65. Sawamura K., et al. Genetic analysis of speciation by means of introgression into Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 97:2000;2652-2655.
66. 2J mutants. Genomics. 58:1999;129-137.
67. Maeda Y.Y., et al. Two interactive genes responsible for a new inherited cataract (RCT) in the mouse. Mamm. Genome. 12:2001;278-283.
68. Zechner U., et al. An X-chromosome linked locus contributes to abnormal placental development in mouse interspecific hybrid. Nat. Genet. 12:1996;398-403.
69. Hemberger M., et al. Genetic and developmental analysis of X-inactivation in interspecific hybrid mice suggest a role for the Y chromosome in placental dysplasia. Genetics. 157:2001;341-348.
70. Mochizuki A., et al. The evolution of genomic imprinting. Genetics. 144:1996;1283-1295.
71. Ye X., et al. A premature-termination mutation in the Mus musculus cyclin-dependent kinase 3 gene. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 98:2001;1682-1686.
72. Enard W., et al. Intra- and interspecific variation in primate gene expression patterns. Science. 296:2002;340-343.