Our original conclusion that serum amyloid P-component (Sap) deficiency in mice, created by targeted deletion of Apcs, causes antinuclear autoantibody production and associated immune complex glomerulonephritis1, was based on our earlier discovery that human SAP binds avidly and specifically to DNA, nuclei, apoptotic cells, long chromatin and nucleosomes core particles, both in vitro and in vivo2, 3, 4, 5. But we were aware of the possibility of confounding by unexpected genetic interactions incurred during gene deletion and subsequent interstrain mouse breeding1. Following our original publication of the presumed Sap knockout phenotype1, we backcrossed the gene deletion into pure-line C57BL/6 mice and extensively investigated their phenotype in very large cohorts of animals up to the age of 12 months6. Although they also developed autoantibodies and glomerulonephritis, this phenotype was not abrogated by introduction of transgenic human SAP6. We also showed that, in contrast to our earlier observations of whole-body clearance of labeled long chromatin in 129/Sv C57BL/6 mice, the plasma clearance of neither long chromatin nor nucleosome core particles was substantially affected by Sap deficiency in C57BL/6 animals6. Furthermore, we found that mouse Sap binds much more weakly than human SAP to DNA and chromatin, and scarcely at all to apoptotic cells6. Notably, we also found that Sap deficiency in pure 129/Sv mice was not associated with any autoimmunity6. Our recent publication of these results concluded that the autoimmune phenotype caused by Apcs deletion was likely to be a consequence of unintended genetic modification and/or interstrain interactions, rather than Sap deficiency6. This was subsequently independently confirmed by Bygrave et al., who produced a congenic strain of C57BL/6 mice carrying just the relevant Apcs-containing segment of 129/Sv chromosome 1 (ref. 7). These animals developed spontaneous antinuclear autoimmunity, although notably not glomerulonephritis. The study of Maeda et al. again confirms these results. An important general conclusion is that attribution of phenotype to loss of function of the deficient product of a targeted deleted gene must include consideration of both mouse strain genetic background and unexpected effects of interstrain genetic interactions.