Synopsis
Preclinical research relies heavily on the use of
traditional research animals which are well-characterized and share our
mammalian ancestry. However, in some cases there exist untraditional research
animals that are more suited to study specific preclinical questions. This is
formulated in the August Krogh Principle: “For a large number of problems there
will be some animal of choice or a few such animals on which it can be most
conveniently studied”. This applies to a number of MRI experiments in which the
use of unusual animal models is justified because of certain capabilities that
cannot be mimicked in traditional models.Outcome/Objectives
The objective of this talk is to inspire preclinical
researchers to “think out of the box” in their selection of research animals
and not limit their perspective to the sole use of traditional animal models,
but rather select a model that is most appropriate for the question of
interest.
Purpose
Preclinical research relies heavily on the use of
traditional research animals such as mouse, rat, guinea pig, rabbit, dog, pig, sheep,
etc. and a wide array of associated disease models. The benefit of this approach
is well-characterized models on both a genetic, anatomical and physiological
level that share a mammalian ancestry with humans. However, in some cases there
exist untraditional research animals that are much more suited to study
specific preclinical or basic biological phenomena. This is formulated in the
August Krogh Principle: “For a large number of problems there will be some
animal of choice or a few such animals on which it can be most conveniently
studied” (Krogh, 1929). This also applies to a number of MRI experiments in
which the use of unusual animal models is justified because of certain
capabilities in the animal that cannot be mimicked in more traditional research
animals.
Overview of
presentation
In this talk, three cases will be presented in which
we have applied unusual animals in preclinical studies. The first case is in the
investigation of regenerative mechanisms in the Mexican axolotl, a salamander
widely applied in regenerative medicine due to an impressive and unsurpassed
ability to regenerate tissue in a wide array of organs and tissues such as cardiac
tissue, intestines, liver, skeletal muscle, central and peripheral nervous
system, lens, retina, jaw, and even whole appendages such as limbs and tail (Stoick-Cooper
et al, 2007). We have applied MRI to monitor cardiac function during complete
regeneration of a cryoinjury affecting 45% of the ventricular myocardium in the
axolotl. Additionally, we have used MRI to track stem-like cells labelled with
super paramagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIOs) in the regenerating limb of
the axolotl. Both experiments would be inapplicable with the use of traditional
mammalian research animals due to the general lack of regenerative potential in
this class.
In the second case we have applied MRI to
non-invasively monitor the phenotypical flexibility of visceral organs during
digestion after prolonging fasting in pythons. In contrary to humans and most
other mammals that do not have the ability to quickly upregulate their
digestive system when exposed to a large meal after prolonged famine caused by
catastrophic events or anorexia, pythons have the ability quickly upregulate
both size and function of their visceral organs after several months of fasting
to accommodate to a meal up to 25% of their body mass.
In the third case we assessed the metabolism in the
rodent placenta using hyperpolarized MRI. To circumvent the obstacle of
multiple and minute fetuses found in most traditional rodent models (such as mouse
and rat) we applied the chinchilla characterized by producing only a single and
relatively large cup per pregnancy.
Finally, we have applied MRI to investigate
physiological mechanisms related to more basic life science questions. I will
briefly discuss how we have applied MRI to investigate the sound producing
apparatus in toothed whales (Wisniewska et al 2015) and digestion mechanisms in
large tarantulas (Lauridsen et al 2011).
Discussion
Changing from well characterized research animals to
more unusual species is not without obstacles in MRI experiments. Unusual research
animals may require other types of anesthesia than usually applied, and as MRI
is often incompatible with easy access to the animal specific anesthesia protocols
needs to be developed in advance. Additionally, anatomical recognition can be
challenging in species not well known and physiological data may need careful
interpretation in the case of no reference values. These obstacles should be assessed
against the potential benefits of selecting an untraditional research animal. However,
if the scientific question of interest points to the use of unusual animal
models these should not be disregarded but rather welcomed as a professional
challenge.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
Krogh A (1929). The progress of physiology. A J Physiol
90: 243-251.
Lauridsen
H, Hansen K, Wang T, Nielsen PA, Andersen JL, Knudsen PS, Rasmussen AS,
Uhrenholdt L and Pedersen M (2011). Inside out: Modern imaging techniques to reveal animal
anatomy. PLoS One 6(3):e17879. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017879
Stoick-Cooper CL, Moon RT and Weidinger G (2007).
Advances in signalling in vertebrate regeneration as a prelude to regenerative
medicine. Genes Dev. 21: 1292-1315.
Wisniewska DM, Racliffe JM, Beedholm K, Christensen
CB, Johnson M, Koblitz JC, Wahlberg M and Madsen PT (2015). Range-dependent
flexibility in the acoustic field of view of echolocating porpoises (Phocoena
phocoena). eLife 2015;4:e05651.