Gene regulatory network reconstruction using single-cell RNA sequencing of barcoded genotypes in diverse environments

Abstract

Understanding how gene expression programs are controlled requires identifying regulatory relationships between transcription factors and target genes. Gene regulatory networks are typically constructed from gene expression data acquired following genetic perturbation or environmental stimulus. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) captures the gene expression state of thousands of individual cells in a single experiment, offering advantages in combinatorial experimental design, large numbers of independent measurements, and accessing the interaction between the cell cycle and environmental responses that is hidden by population-level analysis of gene expression. To leverage these advantages, we developed a method for scRNAseq in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). We pooled diverse transcriptionally barcoded gene deletion mutants in 11 different environmental conditions and determined their expression state by sequencing 38,285 individual cells. We benchmarked a framework for learning gene regulatory networks from scRNAseq data that incorporates multitask learning and constructed a global gene regulatory network comprising 12,228 interactions.

Data availability

Sequencing data has been deposited in GEO: GSE125162Figures 2-7 (& Supplemental Figures 2-7) are generated from a single R markdown document. The scripts and all data necessary to do this analysis are provided as Supplemental Data 1. The raw output (knit HTML file) is provided as Supplemental Data 6.Interactive versions of several figures are available have been made available with the Shiny library in R: http://shiny.bio.nyu.edu/cj59/YeastSingleCell2019/The Inferelator package is available on GitHub and through python package managers (i.e. pip) under an open source license (BSD).

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Christopher A Jackson

    Center For Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8769-2710
  2. Dayanne M Castro

    Department of Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Giuseppe-Antonio Saldi

    Department of Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Richard Bonneau

    Center For Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    bonneau@nyu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. David Gresham

    Center For Genomics and Systems Biology, New York University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    dgresham@nyu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4028-0364

Funding

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK103358)

  • Richard Bonneau

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM107466)

  • David Gresham

National Science Foundation (MCB1818234)

  • David Gresham

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD096770)

  • Richard Bonneau

National Science Foundation (IOS1546218)

  • Richard Bonneau

National Cancer Institute (R01CA229235)

  • Richard Bonneau

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

Copyright

© 2020, Jackson 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

  • 28,591
    views
  • 2,160
    downloads
  • 128
    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. Christopher A Jackson
  2. Dayanne M Castro
  3. Giuseppe-Antonio Saldi
  4. Richard Bonneau
  5. David Gresham
(2020)
Gene regulatory network reconstruction using single-cell RNA sequencing of barcoded genotypes in diverse environments
eLife 9:e51254.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51254

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51254

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.