Experimental Models of Brain Disease: MRI Studies

  • Ian F. HarrisonEmail author
  • Jack A. Wells
  • Mark F. Lythgoe
Reference work entry


Studies involving dedicated high field MRI systems have mushroomed in recent years. In parallel, modelling of neurological disorders using animals have improved substantially, allowing in depth study of both disease aetiology and the effects of therapeutic agents on such models. In particular, the use of transgenic mouse models has called for high-throughput methods to allow in depth phenotyping of mouse lines, and track disease processes with time. This chapter is dedicated to the use of MRI in small animal models of brain disease, and will describe some of the practical issues surrounding the use of MRI, and review the role of MRI in investigating the pathophysiology of the most common neurological disorders.


Alzheimer’s disease Parkinson’s disease Huntington’s disease Stroke traumatic brain injury animal model Multiple Sclerosis preclinical MRI 


  1. 1.
    Andrew ER. N.m.r. imaging of intact biological systems. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1980;289(1037):471–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holmes HE, et al. Imaging the accumulation and suppression of tau pathology using multiparametric MRI. Neurobiol Aging. 2016;39:184–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wells JA, et al. In vivo imaging of tau pathology using multi-parametric quantitative MRI. Neuroimage. 2015;111:369–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cleary JO, et al. Structural correlates of active-staining following magnetic resonance microscopy in the mouse brain. Neuroimage. 2011;56(3):974–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ma D, et al. Automatic structural parcellation of mouse brain MRI using multi-atlas label fusion. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e86576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pan D, et al. Manganese-based MRI contrast agents: past, present and future. Tetrahedron. 2011;67(44):8431–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saar G, et al. Laminar specific detection of APP induced neurodegeneration and recovery using MEMRI in an olfactory based Alzheimer’s disease mouse model. Neuroimage. 2015;118:183–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thuen M, et al. Manganese-enhanced MRI of the rat visual pathway: acute neural toxicity, contrast enhancement, axon resolution, axonal transport, and clearance of Mn2+. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;28(4):855–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pan D, et al. Revisiting an old friend: manganese-based MRI contrast agents. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2011;3(2):162–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Choquet P, et al. Carbon tube electrodes for electrocardiography-gated cardiac multimodality imaging in mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2011;50(1):61–4.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mirsattari SM, et al. EEG monitoring during functional MRI in animal models. Epilepsia. 2007;48:37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burchell SR, et al. Isoflurane provides neuroprotection in neonatal hypoxic ischemic brain injury. J Investig Med. 2013;61(7):1078–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zheng S, Zuo Z. Isoflurane preconditioning induces neuroprotection against ischemia via activation of P38 mitogen-activated protein kinases. Mol Pharmacol. 2004;65(5):1172–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Datla PK, Zbarsky V, Dexter TD. Effects of anaesthetics on the loss of nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons by 6-hydroxydopamine in rats. J Neural Transm. 2005;113(5):583–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ferris CF, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging in conscious animals: a new tool in behavioural neuroscience research. J Neuroendocrinol. 2006;18(5):307–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brevard ME, et al. Changes in MRI signal intensity during hypercapnic challenge under conscious and anesthetized conditions. Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;21(9):995–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weber R, et al. A fully noninvasive and robust experimental protocol for longitudinal fMRI studies in the rat. Neuroimage. 2006;29(4):1303–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Adamczak JM, et al. High field BOLD response to forepaw stimulation in the mouse. Neuroimage. 2010;51(2):704–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petrinovic MM, et al. A novel anesthesia regime enables neurofunctional studies and imaging genetics across mouse strains. Sci Rep. 2016;6:24523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huang Y, Mucke L. Alzheimer mechanisms and therapeutic strategies. Cell. 2012;148(6):1204–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li L, et al. Magnetic resonance T2 relaxation time at 7 Tesla associated with amyloid β pathology and age in a double-transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurosci Lett. 2016;610:92–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Santin MD, et al. In vivo detection of amyloid plaques by gadolinium-stained MRI can be used to demonstrate the efficacy of an anti-amyloid immunotherapy. Front Aging Neurosci. 2016;8:55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ansciaux E, et al. In vitro and in vivo characterization of several functionalized ultrasmall particles of iron oxide, vectorized against amyloid plaques and potentially able to cross the blood–brain barrier: toward earlier diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease by molecular imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2015;10(3):211–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shu X, et al. Voxel-based diffusion tensor imaging of an APP/PS1 mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. Mol Neurobiol. 2013;48(1):78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sun S-W, et al. In vivo diffusion tensor imaging of amyloid-β-induced white matter damage in mice. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;38(1):93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Müller H-P, et al. Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of the brain in APP transgenic mice: a cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e67630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li H, et al. Vascular and parenchymal amyloid pathology in an Alzheimer disease knock-in mouse model: interplay with cerebral blood flow. Mol Neurodegener. 2014;9(1):1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shah D, et al. Resting state fMRI reveals diminished functional connectivity in a mouse model of amyloidosis. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e84241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shah D, et al. Early pathologic amyloid induces hypersynchrony of BOLD resting-state networks in transgenic mice and provides an early therapeutic window before amyloid plaque deposition. Alzheimers Dement. 2016;12(9):964–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Giannakopoulos P, et al. Tangle and neuron numbers, but not amyloid load, predict cognitive status in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology. 2003;60(9):1495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yang D, et al. Volumetric MRI and MRS provide sensitive measures of Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology in inducible Tau transgenic mice (rTg4510). Neuroimage. 2011;54(4):2652–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sahara N, et al. Age-related decline in white matter integrity in a mouse model of tauopathy: an in vivo diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging study. Neurobiol Aging. 2014;35(6):1364–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Colgan N, et al. Application of neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) to a tau pathology model of Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage. 2016;125:739–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wells JA, et al. Increased cerebral vascular reactivity in the tau expressing rTg4510 mouse: evidence against the role of tau pathology to impair vascular health in Alzheimer’s disease. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2015;35(3):359–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dexter DT, Jenner P. Parkinson disease: from pathology to molecular disease mechanisms. Free Radic Biol Med. 2013;62:132–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Khairnar A, et al. Late-stage α-synuclein accumulation in TNWT-61 mouse model of Parkinson’s disease detected by diffusion kurtosis imaging. J Neurochem. 2016;136(6):1259–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cong L, et al. Multimodal MRI evaluation of the MitoPark mouse model of Parkinson’s disease. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0151884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Soria G, et al. In vivo magnetic resonance imaging characterization of bilateral structural changes in experimental Parkinson’s disease: a T2 relaxometry study combined with longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging and manganese-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the 6-hydroxydopamine rat model. Eur J Neurosci. 2011;33(8):1551–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Campa NV, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging in a rat model of Parkinson’s disease after lesioning of the nigrostriatal tract. NMR Biomed. 2009;22(7):697–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Virel A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study striatal iron accumulation in a rat model of Parkinson’s disease. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e112941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Virel A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a tool to image neuroinflammation in a rat model of Parkinson’s disease – phagocyte influx to the brain is promoted by bilberry-enriched diet. Eur J Neurosci. 2015;42(10):2761–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chen C-CV, Shih Y-YI, Chang C. Dopaminergic imaging of nonmotor manifestations in a rat model of Parkinson’s disease by fMRI. Neurobiol Dis. 2013;49:99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Harrison IF, et al. Neurorestoration induced by the HDAC inhibitor sodium valproate in the lactacystin model of Parkinson’s is associated with histone acetylation and up-regulation of neurotrophic factors. Br J Pharmacol. 2015;172(16):4200–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vernon AC, et al. Evolution of extra-nigral damage predicts behavioural deficits in a rat proteasome inhibitor model of Parkinson’s disease. PLoS One. 2011;6(2):e17269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vernon AC, Johansson SM, Modo MM. Non-invasive evaluation of nigrostriatal neuropathology in a proteasome inhibitor rodent model of Parkinson’s disease. BMC Neurosci. 2010;11(1):1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pienaar IS, et al. An animal model mimicking pedunculopontine nucleus cholinergic degeneration in Parkinson’s disease. Brain Struct Funct. 2015;220(1):479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Duyao M, et al. Trinucleotide repeat length instability and age of onset in Huntington’s disease. Nat Genet. 1993;4(4):387–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Walker FO. Huntington’s disease. Lancet. 2007;369(9557):218–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Heng MY, Detloff PJ, Albin RL. Rodent genetic models of Huntington disease. Neurobiol Dis. 2008;32(1):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Heikkinen T, et al. Characterization of neurophysiological and behavioral changes, MRI brain volumetry and 1H MRS in zQ175 knock-in mouse model of Huntington’s disease. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ferris CF, et al. Studies on the Q175 knock-in model of Huntington’s disease using functional imaging in awake mice: evidence of olfactory dysfunction. Front Neurol. 2014;5:94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ferrante RJ. Mouse models of Huntington’s disease and methodological considerations for therapeutic trials. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009;1792(6):506–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rattray I, et al. Correlations of behavioral deficits with brain pathology assessed through longitudinal MRI and histopathology in the R6/1 mouse model of Huntington’s disease. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e84726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rattray I, et al. Correlations of behavioral deficits with brain pathology assessed through longitudinal MRI and histopathology in the R6/2 mouse model of HD. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e60012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sawiak SJ, et al. Use of magnetic resonance imaging for anatomical phenotyping of the R6/2 mouse model of Huntington’s disease. Neurobiol Dis. 2009;33(1):12–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sawiak SJ, et al. Voxel-based morphometry in the R6/2 transgenic mouse reveals differences between genotypes not seen with manual 2D morphometry. Neurobiol Dis. 2009;33(1):20–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zhang J, et al. Longitudinal characterization of brain atrophy of a Huntington’s disease mouse model by automated morphological analyses of magnetic resonance images. Neuroimage. 2010;49(3):2340–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jenkins BG, et al. Effects of CAG repeat length, HTT protein length and protein context on cerebral metabolism measured using magnetic resonance spectroscopy in transgenic mouse models of Huntington’s disease. J Neurochem. 2005;95(2):553–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Duan W, et al. Sertraline slows disease progression and increases neurogenesis in N171-82Q mouse model of Huntington’s disease. Neurobiol Dis. 2008;30(3):312–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Peng Q, et al. The antidepressant sertraline improves the phenotype, promotes neurogenesis and increases BDNF levels in the R6/2 Huntington’s disease mouse model. Exp Neurol. 2008;210(1):154–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Aggarwal M, et al. Spatiotemporal mapping of brain atrophy in mouse models of Huntington’s disease using longitudinal in vivo magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage. 2012;60(4):2086–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cheng Y, et al. Structural MRI detects progressive regional brain atrophy and neuroprotective effects in N171-82Q Huntington’s disease mouse model. Neuroimage. 2011;56(3):1027–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lerch JP, et al. Cortical thickness measured from MRI in the YAC128 mouse model of Huntington’s disease. Neuroimage. 2008;41(2):243–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Steventon JJ, et al. In vivo MRI evidence that neuropathology is attenuated by cognitive enrichment in the Yac128 Huntington’s disease mouse model. J Huntingtons Dis. 2015;4(2):149–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Robertson J, et al. Pathways to motor neuron degeneration in transgenic mouse models. Biochimie. 2002;84(11):1151–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Gurney ME, et al. Motor neuron degeneration in mice that express a human Cu,Zn superoxide dismutase mutation. Science. 1994;264(5166):1772–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Underwood CK, et al. Non-invasive diffusion tensor imaging detects white matter degeneration in the spinal cord of a mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neuroimage. 2011;55(2):455–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Niessen HG, et al. In vivo quantification of spinal and bulbar motor neuron degeneration in the G93A-SOD1 transgenic mouse model of ALS by T2 relaxation time and apparent diffusion coefficient. Exp Neurol. 2006;201(2):293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Evans MC, et al. T2-weighted MRI detects presymptomatic pathology in the SOD1 mouse model of ALS. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2014;34(5):785–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Bucher S, et al. Vacuolization correlates with spin–spin relaxation time in motor brainstem nuclei and behavioural tests in the transgenic G93A-SOD1 mouse model of ALS. Eur J Neurosci. 2007;26(7):1895–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Marcuzzo S, et al. Hind limb muscle atrophy precedes cerebral neuronal degeneration in G93A-SOD1 mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a longitudinal MRI study. Exp Neurol. 2011;231(1):30–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Evans MC, et al. CNS-targeted glucocorticoid reduces pathology in mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2014;2(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Dendrou CA, Fugger L, Friese MA. Immunopathology of multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Immunol. 2015;15(9):545–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ransohoff RM. Animal models of multiple sclerosis: the good, the bad and the bottom line. Nat Neurosci. 2012;15(8):1074–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Budde MD, et al. Axonal injury detected by in vivo DTI correlates with neurological disability in a mouse model of Multiple Sclerosis. NMR Biomed. 2008;21(6):589–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Nessler S, et al. Early MRI changes in a mouse model of multiple sclerosis are predictive of severe inflammatory tissue damage. Brain. 2007;130(8):2186–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Hunger M, et al. Visualization of acute focal lesions in rats with experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis by magnetic nanoparticles, comparing different MRI sequences including phase imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;39(5):1126–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Nathoo N, et al. Susceptibility-weighted imaging in the experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis model of multiple sclerosis indicates elevated deoxyhemoglobin, iron deposition and demyelination. Mult Scler J. 2013;19(6):721–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    MacKenzie-Graham A, et al. Cortical atrophy in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis: in vivo imaging. Neuroimage. 2012;60(1):95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Tambalo S, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of rats with experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis reveals brain cortex remodeling. J Neurosci. 2015;35(27):10088–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kumar A, Aakriti, Gupta V. A review on animal models of stroke: An update. Brain Res Bull. 2016;122:35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Herson PS, Traystman RJ. Animal models of stroke: translational potential at present and in 2050. Future Neurol. 2014;9(5):541–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Li F, et al. A new method to improve in-bore middle cerebral artery occlusion in rats: demonstration with diffusion- and perfusion-weighted imaging. Stroke. 1998;29(8):1715–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Bråtane BT, et al. Ischemic lesion volume determination on diffusion weighted images vs. apparent diffusion coefficient maps. Brain Res. 2009;1279:182–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Zhang S, et al. The temporal evolution of diffusional kurtosis imaging in an experimental middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) model. Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;34(7):889–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Baskerville TA, et al. The influence of gender on ‘tissue at risk’ in acute stroke: a diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging study in a rat model of focal cerebral ischaemia. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2016;36(2):381–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Barber PA, et al. Early T1- and T2-weighted MRI signatures of transient and permanent middle cerebral artery occlusion in a murine stroke model studied at 9.4T. Neurosci Lett. 2005;388(1):54–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Woo C-W, et al. Correlation between lactate and neuronal cell damage in the rat brain after focal ischemia: an in vivo 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopic (1H-MRS) study. Acta Radiol. 2010;51(3):344–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Yan GEN, et al. Early metabolic changes following ischemia onset in rats: an in vivo diffusion-weighted imaging and (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy study at 7.0T. Mol Med Rep. 2015;11(6):4109–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Xiong Y, Mahmood A, Chopp M. Animal models of traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14(2):128–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Mac Donald CL, et al. Detection of traumatic axonal injury with diffusion tensor imaging in a mouse model of traumatic brain injury. Exp Neurol. 2007;205(1):116–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Mac Donald CL, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging reliably detects experimental traumatic axonal injury and indicates approximate time of injury. J Neurosci. 2007;27(44):11869–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Onyszchuk G, et al. Post-acute pathological changes in the thalamus and internal capsule in aged mice following controlled cortical impact injury: a magnetic resonance imaging, iron histochemical, and glial immunohistochemical study. Neurosci Lett. 2009;452(2):204–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Tsenter J, et al. Dynamic changes in the recovery after traumatic brain injury in mice: effect of injury severity on T2-weighted MRI abnormalities, and motor and cognitive functions. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25(4):324–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Foley LM, et al. MRI assessment of cerebral blood flow after experimental traumatic brain injury combined with hemorrhagic shock in mice. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2013;33(1):129–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Boulet T, Kelso ML, Othman SF. Microscopic magnetic resonance elastography of traumatic brain injury model. J Neurosci Methods. 2011;201(2):296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Boulet T, Kelso ML, Othman SF. Long-term in vivo imaging of viscoelastic properties of the mouse brain after controlled cortical impact. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(17):1512–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Rubovitch V, et al. A mouse model of blast-induced mild traumatic brain injury. Exp Neurol. 2011;232(2):280–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian F. Harrison
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jack A. Wells
    • 1
  • Mark F. Lythgoe
    • 1
  1. 1.UCL Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging, Division of MedicineUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations