{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018851756640959727, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001713796058269066, 'mean_word_length': 5.908284023668639, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cause and effect considerations in diagnostic pathology and pathology phenotyping of genetically engineered mice (GEM).

Over the next several decades, biology is embarking on its most ambitious project yet: to annotate the human genome functionally, prioritizing and focusing on those genes relevant to development and disease. Model systems are fundamental prerequisites for this task, and genetically engineered mice (GEM) are by far the most accessible mammalian system because of their anatomical, physiological, and genetic similarity to humans. The scientific utility of GEM has become commonplace since the technology to produce them was established in the early 1980s. Conceptually, however, an efficiently coordinated high-throughput approach that permits correlation between newly discovered genes, functional properties of their protein products, and biological relevance of these products as drug targets has yet to be established. The discipline of veterinary anatomical pathology (hereafter referred to as pathology) is not immune to this requirement for evolution and adaptation, and to address relationships and tissue consequences between tens of thousands of genes and their cognate proteins, novel interdisciplinary technologies and approaches must emerge. Although many of the techniques of pathology are well established, in the context of pathology's contribution to functional annotation of the genome, several conceptually important and unresolved issues remain to be addressed. While an ever-increasing arsenal of genetic and molecular tool-sets are available to evaluate and understand the function of genes and their pathophysiological mechanisms, pathology will continue to play an essential role in confirming cause and effect relationships of gene function in development and disease. This role will continue to be dependent on keen observation, a systematic but disciplined approach, expert knowledge of strain-dependent anatomical differences and incidental lesions, and relevant tissue-based evidence. Miniaturization and high-throughput adaptation of these methods must also continue so that they can complement parallel phenotyping efforts, provide pathology-based data in pace with concurrent phenotyping efforts, and continue to find new utility in the collective effort of functional annotation.