Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Anat Histol Embryol ; 53(4): e13064, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38841825

ABSTRACT

There are different strains of laboratory mouse used in many different fields. These strains differ anatomically. In order to determine these anatomical differences, shape analysis was conducted according to species. CD-1, C57bl/6 and Balb-c strains were preferred to study these differences. Forty-eight adult mouse strains belonging to these strains were utilized. The bones were photographed and geometric morphometry was applied to these photographs. Principal Component Analysis was applied to determine shape variations. In Principal component 1 for cranium, CD-1 and C57bl/6 strain groups showed different shape variations, while Balb-c strain group showed similar shape variations to the other strain groups. Principal Component 1 for the mandible separated the CD-1 and C57bl/6 strain groups in terms of shape variation. Principal Component 2 explained most of the variation between the C57bl/6 and CD-1 lineage groups. In PC1 for molars, the CD-1 group showed a different shape variation from the other groups. Mahalanobis distances and Procrustes distances were measured using Canonical variance analysis to explain the differences between the lineage groups. These measurements were statistically significant. For cranium, in canonical variate 1, CD-1 group of mouse and Balb-c group of mouse were separated from each other. In canonical variate 2, C57bl/6 group of mouse were separated from the other groups. For mandible, Balb-c group of mouse in canonical variate 1 and CD-1 group of mouse in canonical variate 2 were separated from the other groups. For molars, CD-1 group of mouse in canonical variate 1 and Balb-c group of mouse in canonical variate 2 were separated from the other groups. It was thought that these anatomical differences could be caused by genotypic factors as well as dietary differences and many different habits that would affect the way their muscles work.


Subject(s)
Mandible , Mice, Inbred BALB C , Mice, Inbred C57BL , Skull , Animals , Skull/anatomy & histology , Mice/anatomy & histology , Mandible/anatomy & histology , Mice, Inbred BALB C/anatomy & histology , Mice, Inbred C57BL/anatomy & histology , Tooth/anatomy & histology , Principal Component Analysis , Species Specificity , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...