Advertisement

Optical Bioluminescence Protocol for Imaging Mice

  • David Stout
  • John David
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1790)

Abstract

The presence, growth, or decline of transfected cell populations expressing the enzyme Luciferase can be followed in live mice using bioluminescence optical imaging techniques. This protocol describes how to verify the imaging equipment, options for injecting the substrate Luciferin into mice, image acquisition considerations, and commonly used data analysis techniques.

Key words

Bioluminescence Luciferin Luciferase Optical imaging Mouse Oncology Tumor imaging 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was made possible by numerous faculty, student, and staff members at the UCLA Crump Institute for Molecular Imaging Preclinical Technology Imaging Center. Waldemar Ladno, DVM and Darin Williams were invaluable with veterinary and logistical help with operations, education, and research work.

References

  1. 1.
    Rice BW, Cable MD, Nelson MB (2001) In vivo imaging of light-emitting probes. J Biomed Opt 6(4):432–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burton JB, Johnson M, Sato M, Koh SBS, Mulholland DJ, Stout DB, Chatziioannou AF, Phelps ME, Wi H, Wu L (2008) Adenovirus-mediated gene expression imaging to directly detect sentinel lymph node metastasis of prostate cancer. Nat Med 14(8):882–888CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aswendt M, Adamczak J, Couillard-Despres S, Hoehn M (2013) Boosting bioluminescence neuroimaging: an optimized protocol for brain studies. PLoS One 8(2):e55662CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhao H, Doyle TC, Coquoz O, Kalish F, Rice BW, Contag CH (2005) Emission spectra of bioluminescent reporters and interaction with mammalian tissue determine the sensitivity of detection in vivo. J Biomed Opt 10(4):041210–041219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stout DB, Chatziioannou A, Lawson T, Silverman R, Phelps ME (2005) Small animal imaging center design: the Crump Institute at UCLA. Mol Imaging Biol 7(6):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stout DB (2014) Animal handling and preparation for imaging. SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baba S, Cho SY, Ye Z, Cheng L, Engles JM, Wahl RL (2007) How reproducible is bioluminescent imaging of tumor cell growth? Single time point versus the dynamic measurement approach. Mol Imaging Biol 6(5):315–322Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stout DB, Berr S, LeBlanc A, Kalen J, Osborne D, Price J, Schiffer W, Kuntner C, Wall J (2013) Guidance for methods descriptions used in preclinical imaging papers. Mol Imaging Biol 12(7):1–15Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tremoleda JL, Sosabowski J (2015) Imaging technologies and basic considerations for welfare of laboratory rodents. Lab Anim 44(3):97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gordon CJ (2012) Thermal physiology of laboratory mice: defining thermoneutrality. J Thermal Biol 37:654–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    David JM, Knowles S, Lamkin DM, Stout DB (2013) Individually ventilated cage impose cold stress on laboratory mice: a source of systemic experimental variability. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 52(6):738–744PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Collaco AM, Rahman S, Dougherty EJ, Williams BB, Geusz ME (2005) Circadian regulation of a viral gene promoter in live transgenic mice expressing firefly luciferase. Mol Imaging Biol 7(5):342–350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    David JM, Chatziioannou AF, Taschereau R, Wang H, Stout DB (2013) The hidden cost of housing practices: using noninvasive imaging to quantify the metabolic demands of chronic cold stress of laboratory mice. Am Assoc Lab Anim Med 63(5):386–391Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Keyaerts M, Heneweer C, Tchouate-Gainkam LO, Caveliers V, Beattie BJ, Martens GA, Vanhove C, Bossuyt A, Blasberg RG, Lahoutte T (2011) Plasma protein binding of luciferase substrates influences sensitivity and accuracy of bioluminescence imaging. Mol Imaging Biol 13:59–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Virostko J, Chen Z, Fowler M, Poffenberger G, Powers A, Janesen ED (2004) Factors influencing quantification of in vivo bioluminescence imaging: application to assessment of pancreatic islet transplants. Mol Imaging 3(4):333–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fueger BJ, Czernin J, Hildebrandt I, Tran C, Halpern B, Stout DB, Phelps ME, Weber WA (2006) Impact of animal handling on the results of 18F-FDG PET studies in mice. J Nucl Med 47(6):999–1006PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Osborne DR, Kunter C, Berr S, Stout DB (2017) Guidance for efficient small animal imaging quality control. Mol Imaging Biol 19:485–498.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-016-1012-3CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Stout
    • 1
  • John David
    • 2
  1. 1.D&D DesignCulver CityUSA
  2. 2.PfizerLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations