Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025

Simple and Computer-assisted Olfactory Testing for Mice
Published on: June 15, 2015
Is the mouse nose a miniature version of a rat nose? A computational comparative study
Zhenxing Wu1, Jianbo Jiang2, Fritz W Lischka2
1Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, the Ohio State University, 915 Olentangy River Road, Columbus, OH 43212, United States of America.
Background And Objective:
Although the mouse is a widely used animal model in biomedical research, there are few published studies on its nasal aerodynamics, potentially due to its small size. It is not appropriate to assume that mice and rats' nasal structure and airflow characteristics are the same because the ratio of nasal surface area to nasal volume and body weight is much higher in a mouse than in a rat. The aim of this work is to use anatomically accurate image-based computational fluid dynamic modeling to quantitatively reveal the characteristics of mouse nasal airflow and mass transport that haven't been detailed before and find key differences to that of rat nose, which will deepen our understanding of the mouse's physiological functions.
Methods:
We created an anatomically accurate 3D computational nasal model of a B6 mouse using postmortem high-resolution micro-CT scans and simulated the airflow distribution and odor transport patterns under restful breathing conditions. The deposition pattern of airborne particles was also simulated and validated against experimental data. In addition, we calculated the gas chromatograph efficiency of odor transport in the mouse employing the theoretical plate concept and compared it with previous studies involving cat and rat models.
Results:
Similar to the published rat model, respiratory and olfactory flow regimes are clearly separated in the mouse nasal cavity. A high-speed dorsal medial (DM) stream was observed, which enhances the delivery speed and efficiency of odor to the ethmoid (olfactory) recess (ER). The DM stream split into axial and secondary paths in the ER. However, the secondary flow in the mouse is less extensive than in the rat. The gas chromatograph efficiency calculations suggest that the rat may possess a moderately higher odorant transport efficiency than that of the mouse due to its more complex ethmoid recess structure and extensive secondary flow. However, the mouse's nasal structure seems to adapt better to varying airflow velocity.
Conclusions:
Due to the inherent structural disparities, the rat and mouse models exhibit moderate differences in airflow and mass transport patterns, potentially impacting their olfaction and other behavioral habits.
More Related Videos
15:40An Effective Manual Deboning Method To Prepare Intact Mouse Nasal Tissue With Preserved Anatomical Organization
Published on: August 10, 2013
08:36Constructing an Olfactometer for Rodent Olfactory Behavior Studies Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Hyperscanning Study in Psychological Counseling
Published on: April 11, 2025