Cargando…
Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry
Body temperature is a valuable parameter in determining the wellbeing of laboratory animals. However, using body temperature to refine humane endpoints during acute illness generally lacks comprehensiveness and exposes to inter-observer bias. Here we compared two methods to assess body temperature i...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5824949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29476115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22020-6 |
_version_ | 1783302113126776832 |
---|---|
author | Mei, Jie Riedel, Nico Grittner, Ulrike Endres, Matthias Banneke, Stefanie Emmrich, Julius Valentin |
author_facet | Mei, Jie Riedel, Nico Grittner, Ulrike Endres, Matthias Banneke, Stefanie Emmrich, Julius Valentin |
author_sort | Mei, Jie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Body temperature is a valuable parameter in determining the wellbeing of laboratory animals. However, using body temperature to refine humane endpoints during acute illness generally lacks comprehensiveness and exposes to inter-observer bias. Here we compared two methods to assess body temperature in mice, namely implanted radio frequency identification (RFID) temperature transponders (method 1) to non-contact infrared thermometry (method 2) in 435 mice for up to 7 days during normothermia and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) endotoxin-induced hypothermia. There was excellent agreement between core and surface temperature as determined by method 1 and 2, respectively, whereas the intra- and inter-subject variation was higher for method 2. Nevertheless, using machine learning algorithms to determine temperature-based endpoints both methods had excellent accuracy in predicting death as an outcome event. Therefore, less expensive and cumbersome non-contact infrared thermometry can serve as a reliable alternative for implantable transponder-based systems for hypothermic responses, although requiring standardization between experimenters. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5824949 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58249492018-03-01 Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry Mei, Jie Riedel, Nico Grittner, Ulrike Endres, Matthias Banneke, Stefanie Emmrich, Julius Valentin Sci Rep Article Body temperature is a valuable parameter in determining the wellbeing of laboratory animals. However, using body temperature to refine humane endpoints during acute illness generally lacks comprehensiveness and exposes to inter-observer bias. Here we compared two methods to assess body temperature in mice, namely implanted radio frequency identification (RFID) temperature transponders (method 1) to non-contact infrared thermometry (method 2) in 435 mice for up to 7 days during normothermia and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) endotoxin-induced hypothermia. There was excellent agreement between core and surface temperature as determined by method 1 and 2, respectively, whereas the intra- and inter-subject variation was higher for method 2. Nevertheless, using machine learning algorithms to determine temperature-based endpoints both methods had excellent accuracy in predicting death as an outcome event. Therefore, less expensive and cumbersome non-contact infrared thermometry can serve as a reliable alternative for implantable transponder-based systems for hypothermic responses, although requiring standardization between experimenters. Nature Publishing Group UK 2018-02-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5824949/ /pubmed/29476115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22020-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Mei, Jie Riedel, Nico Grittner, Ulrike Endres, Matthias Banneke, Stefanie Emmrich, Julius Valentin Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title | Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title_full | Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title_fullStr | Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title_full_unstemmed | Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title_short | Body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
title_sort | body temperature measurement in mice during acute illness: implantable temperature transponder versus surface infrared thermometry |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5824949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29476115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22020-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meijie bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry AT riedelnico bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry AT grittnerulrike bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry AT endresmatthias bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry AT bannekestefanie bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry AT emmrichjuliusvalentin bodytemperaturemeasurementinmiceduringacuteillnessimplantabletemperaturetransponderversussurfaceinfraredthermometry |