2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2014.07.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

mtDNA sequence, phylogeny and evolution of laboratory mice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In hybridization among subspecies of mice, the disruption of co‐adapted genes increases developmental instability (Auffray et al ., ; Alibert & Auffray, ). This could be the case for the CC mice, as M. m. castaneus and M. m. domesticus are sister subspecies that diverged from M. m. musculus around 435 000–557 000 years ago (Yang et al ., ; Zheng et al ., ). Moreover, wild‐derived inbred strains have large genetic differences as indicated by a large number of SNPs, structural variants and indels compared with the reference mouse genome (Keane et al ., ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In hybridization among subspecies of mice, the disruption of co‐adapted genes increases developmental instability (Auffray et al ., ; Alibert & Auffray, ). This could be the case for the CC mice, as M. m. castaneus and M. m. domesticus are sister subspecies that diverged from M. m. musculus around 435 000–557 000 years ago (Yang et al ., ; Zheng et al ., ). Moreover, wild‐derived inbred strains have large genetic differences as indicated by a large number of SNPs, structural variants and indels compared with the reference mouse genome (Keane et al ., ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Human–primate lineage divergence and generation times were obtained from Langergraber et al 52 . The divergence times for the wild-derived and classical laboratory strains were obtained from Vicens et al 53 , Goios et al 9 , and Zheng et al 54 . The data for the two outgroup species’ divergence times was obtained from Thybert et al 29 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since independent foraging emerges at weaning, we profile developmental changes in early-weaning age (postnatal day 15 [P15]), weaning age (P20), post-weaning age (P25), and adult mice. To test for genetic and parental effects, our design uses reciprocal crosses of the distant subspecies, Mus musculus castaneous (Cast) and C57BL6/J (B6) ( Zheng et al, 2014 ). By comparing the F1cb (Cast mother × B6 father) and F1bc (B6 mother × Cast father) hybrid offspring from these crosses, we test how parental effects influence foraging ( Figures 1 and S1B ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%