Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of sexing methods in fetal mice

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Lab Animal

Abstract

Accurate mouse sexing is vital when conducting research examining sexual dimorphisms. Late fetal and newborn mouse pups are more immature than many previously described sexing methods allow. This study compares the sexing accuracy of a newly described internal gonad sexing method to a recently described peritoneal pigmentation sexing method in embryonic day 20 C57BL/6J mouse pups, using Sry genotyping to confirm the sex. The internal gonad sexing method was found to be highly accurate, while the peritoneal pigmentation method was slightly less accurate. Therefore, while Sry genotyping remains the gold standard, immediate and less expensive sexing methods can be performed accurately as early as the late fetal period in C57BL/6J mice.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1: A representative UV-visualized gel result from Sry genotyping of homogenized tissue from an adult male and an adult female mouse as representative knowns, as well as four E20 mouse pups.
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4: E20 female mouse internal anatomy.
Figure 5: E20 male mouse internal anatomy.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Greenham, L.W. & Greenham, V. Sexing mouse pups. Lab. Anim. 11, 181–184 (1977).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wolterink-Donselaar, I.G., Meerding, J.M. & Fernandes, C. A method for gender determination in newborn dark pigmented mice. Lab Anim. (NY) 38, 35–38 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Whyte, J.J., Roberts, R.M. & Rosenfeld, C.S. Fluorescent in situ hybridization for sex chromosome determination before and after fertilization in mice. Theriogenology 67, 1022–1031 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cook, M. The Anatomy of the Laboratory Mouse (Academic Press Inc., New York, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, H. et al. Identification of novel markers of mouse fetal ovary development. PLoS ONE 7, e41683 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, and Division of Pediatric General, Laboratory for Fetal and Regenerative Biology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Thoracic and Fetal Surgery, Colorado Children's Hospital, Aurora, Colorado

    Scott Deeney, Kyle N. Powers & Timothy M. Crombleholme

Authors
  1. Scott Deeney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kyle N. Powers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy M. Crombleholme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy M. Crombleholme.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deeney, S., Powers, K. & Crombleholme, T. A comparison of sexing methods in fetal mice. Lab Anim 45, 380–384 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1105

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1105

  • Springer Nature America, Inc.

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation