Mapping the transcriptional diversity of genetically and anatomically defined cell populations in the mouse brain

Abstract

Understanding the principles governing neuronal diversity is a fundamental goal for neuroscience. Here we provide an anatomical and transcriptomic database of nearly 200 genetically identified cell populations. By separately analyzing the robustness and pattern of expression differences across these cell populations, we identify two gene classes contributing distinctly to neuronal diversity. Short homeobox transcription factors distinguish neuronal populations combinatorially, and exhibit extremely low transcriptional noise, enabling highly robust expression differences. Long neuronal effector genes, such as channels and cell adhesion molecules, contribute disproportionately to neuronal diversity, based on their patterns rather than robustness of expression differences. By linking transcriptional identity to genetic strains and anatomical atlases we provide an extensive resource for further investigation of mouse neuronal cell types.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in NCBI GEO under accession number GSE79238.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used
    1. Tasic B et al
    (2018) Cell Diversity in the Mouse Cortex
    Available at http://celltypes.brain-map.org/rnaseq.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ken Sugino

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    For correspondence
    ken.sugino@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5795-0635
  2. Erin Clark

    Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4013-325X
  3. Anton Schulmann

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Yasuyuki Shima

    Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Lihua Wang

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. David L Hunt

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Bryan M Hooks

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0135-4284
  8. Dimitri Traenkner

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jayaram Chandrashekar

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6412-0114
  10. Serge Picard

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Andrew L Lemire

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nelson Spruston

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3118-1636
  13. Adam W Hantman

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Sacha B Nelson

    Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    For correspondence
    nelson@brandeis.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0108-8599

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Ken Sugino
  • Anton Schulmann
  • Lihua Wang
  • David L Hunt
  • Bryan M Hooks
  • Dimitri Traenkner
  • Jayaram Chandrashekar
  • Andrew L Lemire
  • Nelson Spruston
  • Adam W Hantman
  • Sacha B Nelson

National Eye Institute (EY022360)

  • Erin Clark
  • Yasuyuki Shima
  • Sacha B Nelson

National Institute of Mental Health (MH105949)

  • Erin Clark
  • Yasuyuki Shima
  • Sacha B Nelson

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS075007)

  • Erin Clark
  • Yasuyuki Shima
  • Sacha B Nelson

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experiments were conducted in accordance with the requirements of theInstitutional Animal Care and Use Committees at Janelia Research Campus (protocol# not available) and Brandeis University (protocol#17001).

Copyright

© 2019, Sugino et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 7,374
    views
  • 1,070
    downloads
  • 66
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ken Sugino
  2. Erin Clark
  3. Anton Schulmann
  4. Yasuyuki Shima
  5. Lihua Wang
  6. David L Hunt
  7. Bryan M Hooks
  8. Dimitri Traenkner
  9. Jayaram Chandrashekar
  10. Serge Picard
  11. Andrew L Lemire
  12. Nelson Spruston
  13. Adam W Hantman
  14. Sacha B Nelson
(2019)
Mapping the transcriptional diversity of genetically and anatomically defined cell populations in the mouse brain
eLife 8:e38619.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38619

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38619

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Steven S Hou, Yuya Ikegawa ... Masato Maesako
    Tools and Resources

    γ-Secretase plays a pivotal role in the central nervous system. Our recent development of genetically encoded Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET)-based biosensors has enabled the spatiotemporal recording of γ-secretase activity on a cell-by-cell basis in live neurons in culture. Nevertheless, how γ-secretase activity is regulated in vivo remains unclear. Here, we employ the near-infrared (NIR) C99 720–670 biosensor and NIR confocal microscopy to quantitatively record γ-secretase activity in individual neurons in living mouse brains. Intriguingly, we uncovered that γ-secretase activity may influence the activity of γ-secretase in neighboring neurons, suggesting a potential ‘cell non-autonomous’ regulation of γ-secretase in mouse brains. Given that γ-secretase plays critical roles in important biological events and various diseases, our new assay in vivo would become a new platform that enables dissecting the essential roles of γ-secretase in normal health and diseases.

    1. Neuroscience
    John P Veillette, Fan Gao, Howard C Nusbaum
    Research Article

    Sensory signals from the body’s visceral organs (e.g. the heart) can robustly influence the perception of exteroceptive sensations. This interoceptive–exteroceptive interaction has been argued to underlie self-awareness by situating one’s perceptual awareness of exteroceptive stimuli in the context of one’s internal state, but studies probing cardiac influences on visual awareness have yielded conflicting findings. In this study, we presented separate grating stimuli to each of subjects’ eyes as in a classic binocular rivalry paradigm – measuring the duration for which each stimulus dominates in perception. However, we caused the gratings to ‘pulse’ at specific times relative to subjects’ real-time electrocardiogram, manipulating whether pulses occurred during cardiac systole, when baroreceptors signal to the brain that the heart has contracted, or in diastole when baroreceptors are silent. The influential ‘Baroreceptor Hypothesis’ predicts the effect of baroreceptive input on visual perception should be uniformly suppressive. In contrast, we observed that dominance durations increased for systole-entrained stimuli, inconsistent with the Baroreceptor Hypothesis. Furthermore, we show that this cardiac-dependent rivalry effect is preserved in subjects who are at-chance discriminating between systole-entrained and diastole-presented stimuli in a separate interoceptive awareness task, suggesting that our results are not dependent on conscious access to heartbeat sensations.