4.0 Article

Gender- and Compartment-Specific Bone Loss in C57BL/6J Mice: Correlation Season?

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL DENSITOMETRY
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 89-94

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2008.10.008

Keywords

Bone compartment; bone mineral density; gender; laboratory mouse; seasonal

Funding

  1. NIH [AR055633, AR053853, AR043618]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES [R21AR055633, R01AR053853, R01AR043618, R55AR043618] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R24DK084970] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Seasonal variation in bone mineral density (BMD) has been documented in humans, and has been attributed to chances in 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] synthesis. To test the hypothesis that seasonal changes in bone mass occur in laboratory mice. we measured body composition, femoral hone phenotypes, and serum hone markers in 16-wk-old male and female C57BL/6 (B6) mice during the summer (June-August) and winter (December-February) months at The Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine. Both male and female B6 mice had higher volumetric BMD in the summer than winter. Females showed reduced trabecular bone, whereas males showed changes in bone volume. Males. but not females. had higher insulin-like growth factor 1 in summer than in winter, and only males showed an increase in body weight during the winter. No seasonal differences in serum TRAP5b. osteocalcin, or 25(OH)D were noted for either sex. We conclude that seasonal variation in skeletal and body composition parameters in B6 mice is significant and must be considered when performing longitudinal phenotyping of the skeleton. Further studies are needed to determine the environmental factors that cue seasonal changes in body composition and the mechanisms that produce these changes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available