Quantification of Induced Hypothermia from Aseptic Scrub Applications during Rodent Surgery Preparation.

Laboratory mice (Mus musculus) are prone to develop hypothermia during anesthesia for surgery, thus potentially impeding anesthetic recovery, wound healing, and future health. The core body temperatures of isoflurane-anesthetized mice are influenced by the choice of supplemental heat sources; however, the contribution of various surgical scrubs on the body temperatures of mice under gas anesthesia has not been assessed. We sought to quantify the effect of using alcohol (70% isopropyl alcohol [IPA]) compared with saline to rinse away surgical scrub on the progression of hypothermia in anesthetized mice (n = 47). IPA, room-temperature saline, or warmed saline (37 °C) was combined with povidone-iodine and then assessed for effects on core (rectal) and surface (infrared) temperatures. Agents were applied to a 2×2-cm shaved abdominal area of mice maintained on a water-recirculating blanket (at 38 °C) under isoflurane anesthesia (1.5% to 2.0% at 0.6 L/min) for 30 min. Although all scrub regimens significantly decreased body temperature at the time of application, treatments that included povidone-iodine led to the coldest core temperatures, which persisted while mice were anesthetized. Compared with room-temperature saline and when combined with povidone-iodine, warming of saline did not ameliorate heat loss. IPA alone demonstrated the most dramatic cooling of both surface and core readings at application but generated an unanticipated warming (rebound) phase during which body temperatures equilibrated with those of controls within minutes of application. Although alcohol is inappropriate as a stand-alone agent for surgical skin preparation, IPA is a viable alternative to saline-based rinses in this context, and its use should be encouraged within institutional guidance for rodent surgical procedures without concern for prolonged hypothermia in mice.

Quantification of Induced Hypothermia from Aseptic Scrub Applications during Rodent Surgery Preparation.

Laboratory mice (Mus musculus) are prone to develop hypothermia during anesthesia for surgery, thus potentially impedinganesthetic recovery, wound healing, and future health. The core body temperatures of isoflurane-anesthetized mice areinfluenced by the choice of supplemental heat sources; however, the contribution of various surgical scrubs on the bodytemperatures of mice under gas anesthesia has not been assessed. We sought to quantify the effect of using alcohol (70%isopropyl alcohol [IPA]) compared with saline to rinse away surgical scrub on the progression of hypothermia in anesthetizedmice (n = 47). IPA, room-temperature saline, or warmed saline (37 °C) was combined with povidone-iodine and thenassessed for effects on core (rectal) and surface (infrared) temperatures. Agents were applied to a 2×2-cm shaved abdominalarea of mice maintained on a water-recirculating blanket (at 38 °C) under isoflurane anesthesia (1.5% to 2.0% at 0.6 L/min)for 30 min. Although all scrub regimens significantly decreased body temperature at the time of application, treatments thatincluded povidone-iodine led to the coldest core temperatures, which persisted while mice were anesthetized. Comparedwith room-temperature saline and when combined with povidone-iodine, warming of saline did not ameliorate heat loss.IPA alone demonstrated the most dramatic cooling of both surface and core readings at application but generated an unanticipatedwarming (rebound) phase during which body temperatures equilibrated with those of controls within minutes ofapplication. Although alcohol is inappropriate as a stand-alone agent for surgical skin preparation, IPA is a viable alternativeto saline-based rinses in this context, and its use should be encouraged within institutional guidance for rodent surgicalprocedures without concern for prolonged hypothermia in mice.

Functional and modular analyses of diverse endoglucanases from Ruminococcus albus 8, a specialist plant cell wall degrading bacterium.

Ruminococcus albus 8 is a specialist plant cell wall degrading ruminal bacterium capable of utilizing hemicellulose and cellulose. Cellulose degradation requires a suite of enzymes including endoglucanases, exoglucanases, and ß-glucosidases. The enzymes employed by R. albus 8 in degrading cellulose are yet to be completely elucidated. Through bioinformatic analysis of a draft genome sequence of R. albus 8, seventeen putatively cellulolytic genes were identified. The genes were heterologously expressed in E. coli, and purified to near homogeneity. On biochemical analysis with cellulosic substrates, seven of the gene products (Ra0185, Ra0259, Ra0325, Ra0903, Ra1831, Ra2461, and Ra2535) were identified as endoglucanases, releasing predominantly cellobiose and cellotriose. Each of the R. albus 8 endoglucanases, except for Ra0259 and Ra0325, bound to the model crystalline cellulose Avicel, confirming functional carbohydrate binding modules (CBMs). The polypeptides for Ra1831 and Ra2535 were found to contain distantly related homologs of CBM65. Mutational analysis of residues within the CBM65 of Ra1831 identified key residues required for binding. Phylogenetic analysis of the endoglucanases revealed three distinct subfamilies of glycoside hydrolase family 5 (GH5). Our results demonstrate that this fibrolytic bacterium uses diverse GH5 catalytic domains appended with different CBMs, including novel forms of CBM65, to degrade cellulose.

How free of germs is germ-free? Detection of bacterial contamination in a germ free mouse unit.

Management of germ free animals has changed little since the beginning of the 20th century. The current upswing in their use, however, has led to interest in improved methods of screening and housing. Traditionally, germ free colonies are screened for bacterial colonization by culture and examination of Gram stained fecal samples, but some investigators have reported using PCR-based methods of microbial detection, presumably because of perceived increased sensitivity. The accuracy and detection limit for traditional compared to PCR-based screening assays are not known. The purpose of this study was to determine the limit of detection of bacterial contamination of mouse feces by aerobic and anaerobic culture, Gram stain, and qPCR, and to compare the accuracy of these tests in the context of a working germ free mouse colony. We found that the limit of detection for qPCR (approximately 10(5) cfu/g of feces) was lower than for Gram stain (approximately 10(9) cfu/g), but that all 3 assays were of similar accuracy. Bacterial culture was the most sensitive, but the least specific, and qPCR was the least sensitive and most specific. Gram stain but not qPCR detected heat-killed bacteria, indicating that bacteria in autoclaved diet are unlikely to represent a potential confounding factor for PCR screening. We conclude that as a practical matter, bacterial culture and Gram stain are adequate for screening germ free mouse colonies for bacterial contaminants, but that should low numbers of unculturable bacteria be present, they would not be detected with any of the currently available means.