Key result
The novel congenic R6/2 mouse line with 110 CAG repeats exhibited minimal intergenerational instability and progressive behavioral impairments starting around 6 weeks of age.
p-value: p=<0.001
New stable R6/2 line may aid preclinical HD modeling; leaves open human translation and clinical relevance.
In the present study we report on the use of speed congenics to generate a C57BL/6J congenic line of HD-model R6/2 mice carrying 110 CAG repeats, which uniquely exhibits minimal intergenerational instability. We also report the first identification of the R6/2 transgene insertion site. The relatively stable line of 110 CAG R6/2 mice was characterized for the onset of behavioral impairments in motor, cognitive and psychiatric-related phenotypes as well as the progression of disease-related impairments from 4 to 10 weeks of age. 110Q mice exhibited many of the phenotypes commonly associated with the R6/2 model including reduced activity and impairments in rotarod performance. The onset of many of the phenotypes occurred around 6 weeks and was progressive across age. In addition, some phenotypes were observed in mice as early as 4 weeks of age. The present study also reports the onset and progression of changes in several molecular phenotypes in the novel R6/2 mice and the association of these changes with behavioral symptom onset and progression. Data from TR-FRET suggest an association of mutant protein state changes (soluble versus aggregated) in disease onset and progression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cowin et al. (2011) studied Huntington's disease (animal model) (n=219). R6/2 transgenic mutation (110 CAG repeats) vs. Wild-type littermates was evaluated on Behavioral impairments (e.g., open field activity, rotarod performance) and molecular phenotypes (p=<0.001). The novel congenic R6/2 mouse line with 110 CAG repeats exhibited minimal intergenerational instability and progressive behavioral impairments starting around 6 weeks of age.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: