Global spread of mouse-adapted Staphylococcus aureus lineages CC1, CC15, and CC88 among mouse breeding facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously reported that laboratory mice from all global vendors are frequently colonized with Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus). Genotyping of a snap sample of murine S. aureus isolates from Charles River, US, showed that mice were predominantly colonized with methicillin-sensitive CC88 strains. Here, we expanded our view and investigated whether laboratory mice from other global animal facilities are colonized with similar strains or novel S. aureus lineages, and whether the murine S. aureus isolates show features of host adaptation. In total, we genotyped 230 S. aureus isolates from various vendor facilities of laboratory mice around the globe (Charles River facilities in the USA, Canada, France, and Germany; another US facility) and university- or company-associated breeding facilities in Germany, China and New Zealand. Spa typing was performed to analyse the clonal relationship of the isolates. Moreover, multiplex PCRs were performed for human-specific virulence factors, the immune-evasion cluster (IEC) and superantigen genes (SAg). We found a total of 58 different spa types that clustered into 15 clonal complexes (CCs). Three of these S. aureus lineages had spread globally among laboratory mice and accounted for three quarters of the isolates: CC1 (13.5%), CC15 (14.3%), and CC88 (47.0%). Compared to human colonizing isolates of the same lineages, the murine isolates frequently lacked IEC genes and SAg genes on mobile genetic elements, implying long-term adaptation to the murine host. In conclusion, laboratory mice from various vendors are colonized with host-adapted S. aureus-strains of a few lineages, predominantly the CC88 lineage. S. aureus researchers must be cautioned that S. aureus colonization might be a relevant confounder in infection and vaccination studies and are therefore advised to screen their mice before experimentation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".