The 8 Weirdest Mice in Research Labs

Nude mouse.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nacktmaus_01.jpg">Armin Kübelbeck</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Research labs are home to mice of all sizes and shapes and genes. There’s your common and ordinary dark-coated Black-6, one of the most intensely scrutinized animals on the planet. And then there are…well, see for yourself: 

Nude mouse

Baldness is only the most obvious thing strange about this mouse. The same mutation that make it hairless also severely weakens its immune system, so that it no longer rejects grafts of foreign tissue, even from a different species. And if you’re a cancer researcher, the foreign tissue of interest is human tumors. Implanting human cancer cells under the skin of immunodeficient mice and testing candidate drugs is a standard technique in research. If the tumor shrinks, then ring-ding-ding, you’ve got a potential cancer drug. In the past couple of decades, researchers have leveled up to hairless mice with more fully defunct immune systems, having not one but three nonfunctional immune genes.

“Earmouse”

At least this cartilage on my back is better than a tumor? WikipediaAt least this cartilage on my back is better than a tumor? WikipediaLet’s begin with what this is not. This is not a human ear growing on a mouse. This is a piece of cow cartilage that just so happens—okay fine, it was on purpose—to be in the shape of a human ear.

Those of lucky enough to have two intact ears have probably never thought about how oddly shaped ear cartilage is. But for doctors, that means that trying to growing cartilage in the right shape for ear reconstruction is difficult. Dr. Charles Vacanti in 1997 created a biodegradable scaffold seeded with cow cartilage cells. Implanted in a nude mouse, the animal’s blood vessels nourished the cartilage cells until they grew to replace the simultaneously dissolving scaffold. This piece of cartilage was never implanted in a human—cow cartilage, after all, would be rejected by a normal immune system—but Dr. Vacanti used a similar technique to grow the chest plate of a 16-year-old boy born without cartilage on his left side.

Not (entirely) hairless mouse

Nature CommunicationsNature CommunicationsSometimes scientists use bald mice for tissue grafts, and sometimes scientists use them just because they’re bald. This little tuft of hair here could someday be the salve of balding men. Earlier this year, Japanese researchers reported successfully growing hair by implanting human or mouse stem cells into the skin of nude mice. The hair follicles even connected to nerves and muscle, so these albeit wispy-looking hairs could stand on their ends, just like when you get goose bumps.

Bonus: Bad Hair Day (Bhrd) is the real name of a mouse mutant. They look exactly how you’d expect. Arguably, not as bad the one tuft of hair.

Mouse with human sphincter

How shall we put it? This is a mouse with the asshole of a human. Missing an ear or some hair is inconvenient, but missing a functional anal sphincter, as can happen due to injuries during childbirth, makes life actually difficult. These lab-built sphincters are made of human muscle cells and mouse nerves. Implanting the petri dish-grown sphincter under the skin of mice proved it could link up to blood vessels and nerves of the animal. Now, it didn’t actually replace the mouse’s own anal sphincter, but that experiment is in progress. 

Morbidly obese mouse

Admit it, we're the cutest mice you've seen in this post. The Journal of HeredityAdmit it, we’re the cutest mice you’ve seen in this post. Journal of Heredity

In the summer of 1949, some very normal-looking mice were born into The Jackson Laboratory in Maine. As time passed however—21 days in photo A, 10 months in photo B—these mice showed a voracious appetite, eating and eating until they ballooned into small fur pillows with tails. With fat cells both abnormally large and numerous, the mice weighed as much as three of their lean counterparts.

These were the first ob/ob mice, so named because they have two defunct copies of the ob gene. This strain has become widely used in obesity and diabetes research, and The Jackson Laboratory is now one of the largest mouse breeding facilities in the US, providing research labs with milions of mice like this.

Real life Frankenstein—conjoining an obese mouse with a normal mouse

Figuring out how the ob gene actually worked took decades and a Frankenstein-like technique called parabiosis. Think conjoined twins, except the two “twins” aren’t related. Parabiosis requires making a shoulder-to-hip incision down the sides of two mice and delicately sewing them together. Once the wound healed, the conjoined mice share one the same blood.

In one the most famous parabiosis experiments, Douglas Coleman conjoined an obese ob/ob mouse with a normal one. Becoming attached to a normal mouse “fixed” some of the health problems in ob/ob, making it eat less, have lower blood sugar, and lose weight. This and other parabiosis experiments with diabetic mutants led Coleman to conclude that ob/ob mice lacked in their blood a “satiety factor,” or some hormone that let them know when they were hungry. That’s why sharing blood with a normal mouse helped.

In 1994, 45 years after ob/ob was first discovered, scientists finally pinpointed the exact gene that made the mice obese. Indeed, the gene made a hormone called leptin that regulates appetite and metabolism. As in mice, problems with leptin can cause obesity in humans. 

A tumor for every follicle

While the leptin gene find took years and years to find in the 90s, geneticists today have sophisticated techniques that easily target single genes. Knockout mice lacking a specific gene and transgenic mice engineered to have additional genes are workhorses of the modern lab.

This transgenic K5ras mouse (pdf) Current BiologyCurrent Biologyis one example. Aside from studying implanted tumors in nude mice, cancer researchers also work with genetic models, and overexpression of the ras gene makes mice especially prone to cancer. The prefix K5 refers to a genetic tag that means ras only gets overexpressed in the skin of this mouse. And overexpressed it is. In this barely recognizable muzzle of mouse, there’s a tumor in every follicle. About 20 percent of all tumors have mutations that make ras overactive, so it’s a key cancer gene.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate