MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319165003 · doi:10.1101/2023.02.03.527019

Using single-cell RNA sequencing to generate cell-type-specific split-GAL4 reagents throughout development

2023· preprint· en· W4319165003 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu‐Chieh Chen, Yen‐Chung Chen, Raghuvanshi Rajesh, Nathalie Shoji, Maisha Jacy, Haluk Lacin, Ted Erclik, Claude Desplan

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthYork UniversityNew York State Stem Cell Science
KeywordsEnhancerComputational biologyBiologyCell typeGeneCRISPRGene expressionGeneticsCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell-type-specific tools facilitate the identification and functional characterization of distinct cell types, which underly the complexity of neuronal circuits. A large collection of existing genetic tools in Drosophila relies on enhancer activity to label different subsets of cells. These enhancer-based GAL4 lines often fail to show a predicable expression pattern to reflect the expression of nearby gene(s), partly due to an incomplete capture of the full gene regulatory elements. While genetic intersectional technique such as the split-GAL4 system further improve cell-type-specificity, it requires significant time and resource to generate and screen through combinations of enhancer expression patterns. In addition, since existing enhancer-based split-GAL4 lines that show cell-type-specific labeling in adult are not necessarily active nor specific in early development, there is a relative lack of tools for the study of neural development. Here, we use an existing single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) dataset to select gene pairs and provide an efficient pipeline to generate cell-type-specific split-GAL4 lines based on the native genetic regulatory elements. These gene-specific split-GAL4 lines can be generated from a large collection of coding intronic MiMIC/CRIMIC lines either by embryo injection or in vivo cassette swapping crosses and/or CRISPR knock-in at the N or C terminal of the gene. We use the developing Drosophila visual system as a model to demonstrate the high prediction power of scRNAseq-guided gene specific split-GAL4 lines in targeting known cell types. The toolkit allows efficient cluster annotation in scRNAseq datasets but also the identification of novel cell types. Lastly, the gene-specific split-GAL4 lines are broadly applicable to Drosophila tissues. Our work opens new avenues for generating cell-type-specific tools for the targeted manipulation of distinct cell types throughout development and represents a valuable resource to the fly research community. Significance Statement Understanding the functional role of individual cell types in the nervous systems has remained a major challenge for neuroscience researchers, partly due to incomplete identification and characterization of underlying cell types. To study the development of individual cell types and their functional roles in health and disease, experimental access to a specific cell type is often a prerequisite. Here, we establish an experimental pipeline to generate gene-specific split-GAL4 guided by single-cell RNA sequencing datasets. These lines show high accuracy for labeling targeted cell types from early developmental stages to adulthood and can be applied to any tissues in Drosophila. The collection of gene-speicifc-split-GAL4 will provide a valuable resource to the entire fly research community.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207