Using standard nomenclature to adequately name transgenes, knockout gene alleles and any mutation associated to a genetically modified mouse strain
Abstract
Mice provide an unlimited source of animal models to study mammalian gene function and human diseases. The powerful genetic modification toolbox existing for the mouse genome enables the creation of, literally, thousands of genetically modified mouse strains, carrying spontaneous or induced mutations, transgenes or knock-out/knock-in alleles which, in addition, can exist in hundreds of different genetic backgrounds. Such an immense diversity of individuals needs to be adequately annotated, to ensure that the most relevant information is kept associated with the name of each mouse line, and hence, the scientific community can correctly interpret and benefit from the reported animal model. Therefore, rules and guidelines for correctly naming genes, alleles and mouse strains are required. The Mouse Genome Informatics Database is the authoritative source of official names for mouse genes, alleles, and strains. Nomenclature follows the rules and guidelines established by the International Committee on Standardized Genetic Nomenclature for Mice. Herewith, both from the International Society for Transgenic Technologies (ISTT) and from the scientific journal Transgenic Research, we would like to encourage all our colleagues to adhere and follow adequately the standard nomenclature rules when describing mouse models. The entire scientific community using genetically modified mice in experiments will benefit.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reporting the correct nomenclature is crucial to understanding the data and ensuring that the research is discoverable and replicable.
“Reporting the correct nomenclature is crucial to understanding the data and ensuring that the research is discoverable and replicable [116–118].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [118]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0
Percie du Sert, N., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., Emerson, M., et al. (2020) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411 · Cited by 2,677 · see citing works
- Authors
- Montoliu, L., & Whitelaw, C. B. A.
- Venue
- Transgenic Research
- Published
- 2010-07-15
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 435-440
- ISSN
- 0962-8819 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-9368
- OpenAlex
- W2021070828
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Transgenic Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Michigan
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Animal Genetics and Reproduction
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Keywords
- genetically modified mice, transgenes, knockout alleles, knock-in allele, gene nomenclature, animal models
- MeSH terms
- Alleles, Animals, Biotechnology, Mice, Inbred Strains, Mice, Transgenic, Mutation, Terminology as Topic, Reference Standards, Societies, Scientific, Mice, Knockout, Transgenes, Models, Animal, Animals, Genetically Modified, Mice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review