Comparing Mouse Health Monitoring Between Soiled-bedding Sentinel and Exhaust Air Dust Surveillance Programs

Abstract

To monitor rodent colony health in research facilities, soiled-bedding sentinel (SBS) animals have traditionally been used. SBS can be tested by various methods, which may include serology, PCR analysis, and necropsy. Several pathogens are unreliably detected by using SBS or transmitted poorly through soiled bedding, and collection and evaluation of SBS samples can be time-intensive. Recently, exhaust air dust (EAD) testing through PCR analysis has emerged as an adjunct or replacement method for rodent colony health monitoring. EAD monitoring may provide a more efficient, sensitive, and humane method for monitoring health status. Using both EAD and SBS health monitoring, we evaluated colony health over the course of 1 y in 3 research barrier rooms in which mice were housed exclusively on IVC racks. Three pathogens—Helicobacter spp., Rodentibacter spp. (previously Pasteurella pneumotropica), and murine norovirus (MNV)—were not excluded in 2 of the rooms, and we expected that these mice would test positive with some regularity. EAD monitoring was significantly more sensitive than SBS for detection of the bacterial agents. SBS failed to detect Helicobacter spp. at time points when EAD had 100% detection in the rooms that did not exclude the bacteria. The detection of MNV did not differ between health monitoring systems at any time point. The findings suggest that EAD is especially valuable in detecting bacteria poorly transmitted through soiled bedding. In addition, the corresponding results with MNV detection suggest that EAD surveillance can reliably be implemented as an alternative to SBS monitoring in a facility in which mice are housed exclusively on IVC racks.

Health Monitoring of Laboratory Rodent Colonies—Talking about (R)evolution

“…Until now, EAD-based monitoring approaches proved to be suitable for a broad variety of infectious agents, such as MNV [ 161 , 167 ], MHV [ 158 ], Murine Astrovirus [ 168 ], Lactate–Dehydrogenase–Elevating–Virus (LDEV) [ 169 ], Rodentibacter sp. [ 153 , 162 ], Helicobacter sp.…”

Microbiota and environmental health monitoring of mouse colonies by metagenomic shotgun sequencing

“…PCR on nucleic acids extracted from filters has proven to be more sensitive and effective than the use of sentinels for the detection of specific pathogens such as Murine norovirus (MNV) (Zorn et al, 2017 ), Mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) (O’Connell et al, 2021 ), Sendai virus (Compton et al, 2004b ), Murine Astrovirus (Korner et al, 2019 ), Pasteurella pneumotropica (Miller et al, 2016 ), Helicobacter spp. (Mailhiot et al, 2020 ), Lactate dehydrogenase elevating virus (LDV) (Luchins et al, 2020b ), Pneumocystis murina (Miller and Brielmeier, 2018 ), fur mites (Hanson et al, 2021 ) ( Gerwin et al, 2017 ) ( Korner et al, 2019 ) Protozoa and pinworm (Kapoor et al, 2017 ) (Dubelko et al 2018 ) (Bauer et al, 2016 ). This rodent-free approach is ethical reducing animals and animal manipulations.…”

Detection of Waterborne and Airborne Microorganisms in a Rodent Facility

“…Several studies have identified pathogenic and other fungi and bacteria in animal facilities for rodents (Carriquiriborde et al 2020, Na et al 2010, Kunstyr et al 1997, and quality control recommendations for ensuring rodent health have been implemented. Nevertheless, these parameters do not cover the entire environment of animal facilities (Felasa 2014, Na et al 2010, Mailhiot et al 2020. Information regarding monitoring and maintenance of air and water microbial quality is currently available (Dawson & Sartory 2000, Kim et al 2018, Leclerc et al 2001, Edstrom & Curran 2003, Westall et al 2015, which is essential for formulating ways to detect and to control infections caused by pathogenic and opportunistic microorganisms in animal facilities (Schlapp et al 2018, Cincinelli & Martellini 2017, Mansfield et al 2010, Kunstyr et al 1997, Ooms et al 2008, Westall et al 2015.…”