Abstract
Recent studies have evaluated alternatives to the use of live animals in colony health monitoring. Currently, an alternative method that is suitable for all rack types and that has been verified to detect the infectious agents most commonly excluded from mouse colonies is unavailable. We compared the use of filter paper placed on the inside floor of mouse cages to the traditional use of sentinel mice in the detection of several prevalent murine pathogens including mouse hepatitis virus (MHV), murine norovirus (MNV), minute virus of mice (MVM), mouse parvovirus (MPV), Theiler murine encephalomyelitis virus (TMEV), Helicobacter spp., Syphacia obvelata, and Aspiculuris tetraptera. Experimental groups comprised 7 cages containing either 2 pieces of filter paper on the cage floor or 2 ICR sentinel mice. Soiled bedding from pet-store mice was transferred to the experimental cages weekly for 8 wk. At 1 and 2 mo after bedding transfer, the filter papers were evaluated by PCR and sentinel mice were tested by serology and fecal PCR. Filter papers detected all pathogens as effectively (MHV, MNV, MPV, MVM, TMEV S. obvelata, and A. tetraptera) or more effectively (Helicobacter spp.) than sentinel mice at both time points. Filter papers more readily detected pathogens with a high copy number per RT-PCR analysis than a low copy number. Helicobacter spp. were not detected by sentinel mice at either time point. These results indicate that the use of filter paper placed on the interior floor of empty mouse cages and exposed to soiled bedding is efficient in detecting bacteria, endoparasites, and most of the common mouse viruses included in an animal health monitoring program.