Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundSpatial transcriptomics allow us to ask a fundamental question: how do nearby cells orchestrate their gene expression? Rather than focus on how these cells (samples) communicate with each other, we reframe the problem to investigate how genes (features) coordinate their expression between neighboring cells. To this end, we introduce "cross-expression," which models the degree to which genes coordinate their expression across spatially adjacent cells, avoiding the use of curated databases and cell type labels while controlling for cell-intrinsic processes.ResultsWe use multiple atlas-scale adult mouse brain datasets (~25 million cells, 695 slices from 52 brains, 8 technologies) to create an integrated, meta-analytic cross-expression network, whose communities are enriched in spatial processes such as synaptic signaling and G protein coupled receptor activity. Highlighting cross-expression's biological utility, our network shows that genes Drd1 and Gpr6, which are individually implicated in Parkinson's disease (PD), are cross-expressed within the striatum, hinting at their joint role in PD pathophysiology. It also recovers ligand-receptor pairs as cross-expressing genes and finds gene combinations that mark anatomical regions, thus complementing cell-cell communication approaches and marker gene-based region annotation, respectively.ConclusionsWe offer a gene-centric perspective to understand spatially coordinated expression between neighboring cells. Our method only requires the gene expression and cell location matrices to find cross-expressing gene pairs. The R package is available at https://github.com/gillislab/CrossExpression .
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.