Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of phenotype and copper distribution in blotchy and brindled mutant mice and in nutritionally copper deficient controls

  • Published:
Biological Trace Element Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The murine mottled mutants brindled, Mo br, and blotchy, Mo blo, are valuable animal models for the study of mammalian copper metabolism. In this paper, we present data showing that a nutritionally copper deficient suckling mouse, Cu, with strong phenotypic similarities to the brindled mutant can be produced by feeding genetically normal dams a copper deficient diet (0.1–0.4 ppm Cu2+) from the day of mating.

Comparisons of copper distribution between the Cu mice and brindled mutants indicate that when a small dose of copper (0.5–0.9 μg Cu2+) was administered by intracardiac injection, the copper was abnormally distributed, and that the pattern of tissue distribution was very similar in Cu mice and brindled mutants 24 h after injection. When, however, a treatment dose (50 μg Cu2+) was injected subcutaneously, and tissues assayed 3 d after injection, copper distribution in Cu mice and brindled mutants was clearly different.

Copper deficiency in Cu suckling mice is entirely derived from maternal effects. Evidence that maternal effects may also influence the survival and phenotype of the brindled and blotchy mutants was obtained by comparing the viability of mutants born to dams carrying mottled mutations on one or both X chromosomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. M. Hunt,Nature 249, 852 (1974).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. D. W. Rowe, E. B. McGoodwin, G. R. Martin, M. D. Sussman, D. Grahn, B. Faris, and C. Franzblau,J. Exp. Med. 139, 180 (1974).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. J. Mann, J. Camakaris, and E. G. Danks,Biochem. J. 180, 605 (1979a).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. J. Mann, J. Camakaris, and D. M. Danks,Biochem. J. 180, 613 (1979b).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. J. Mann, J. Camakaris, N. Francis, and D. M. Danks,Biochem. J. 196, 81 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. D. M. Danks,Inorganic Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, vol. 1, Elsevier, North-Holland Biomedical Press, Amsterdam (1977), pp. 73–100.

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. Camakaris, M. Phillips, D. M. Danks, R. Brown, and T. Stevenson,J. Inher. Metab. Dis. 6, Suppl. (1), 44 (1983).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. H. Kuivaniemi, L. Peltonen, A. Palotie, I. Kaitila, and K. T. Kivirikko,J. Clin. Invest. 69, 730 (1982).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. K. Peltonen, H. Kuivaniemi, A. Palotie, N. Horn, I. Kaitila, and K. I. Kivirikko,Biochem. 22, 6156 (1983).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. H. Kuivaniemi, L. Peltonen, and K. T. Kivirikko,Am. J. Hum. Genet. 37, 798 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. M. Phillips, J. Camakaris and D. M. Danks,Biochem. J. 238 177 (1986).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Report of the American Institute of Nutritionad hoc committee on standards for nutritional studies.J. Nutr. 107, 1340 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. R. Prohaska,Nutr. Res. 1, 159 (1981).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. J. Camakaris, J. R. Mann, and D. M. Danks,Biochem. J. 180, 597 (1979).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. D. Grahn, K. F. Alen, R. N. Feinstein, R. J. Flynn, R. J. M. Fry, J. S. Hulesch, and R. A. Lea,Mouse Newsletter 44, 15 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  16. G. Wenk, and KJ. Suzuki,J. Neurochem. 41, 1648 (1983).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. J. Camakaris, D. M. Danks, L. Ackland, E. Cartwright, P. Borger, and R. G. H. Cotton,Biochem. Genet. 18, 117 (1980).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. D. M. Hunt,Life Sciences 19, 1913 (1976).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hunt, D. M.Comp. Biochem. Biophysiol. 57, 79 (1977).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. H. Delhez, H. W. Prins, L. Prinsen, and C. J. A. Van Den Hamer,Path. Res. Pract. 178, 48 (1983).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. H. M. Darwish, J. E. Hoke, and M. T. Ettinger,J. Biol. Chem. 258, 1362 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Phillips, M., Camakaris, J. & Danks, D.M. A comparison of phenotype and copper distribution in blotchy and brindled mutant mice and in nutritionally copper deficient controls. Biol Trace Elem Res 29, 11–29 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03032670

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03032670

Index Entries

Navigation