Abstract
Single-cell transcriptional profiling has become a widespread tool in cell identification, particularly in the nervous system, based on the notion that genomic information determines cell identity. However, many cell-type classification studies are unconstrained by other cellular attributes (e.g., morphology, physiology). Here, we systematically test how accurately transcriptional profiling can assign cell identity to well-studied anatomically and functionally identified neurons in 2 small neuronal networks. While these neurons clearly possess distinct patterns of gene expression across cell types, their expression profiles are not sufficient to unambiguously confirm their identity. We suggest that true cell identity can only be determined by combining gene expression data with other cellular attributes such as innervation pattern, morphology, or physiology.
Understanding circuit organization depends on identification of cell types. Recent advances in transcriptional profiling methods have enabled classification of cell types by their gene expression. While exceptionally powerful and high throughput, the ground-truth validation of these methods is difficult: If cell type is unknown, how does one assess whether a given analysis accurately captures neuronal identity? To shed light on the capabilities and limitations of solely using transcriptional profiling for cell-type classification, we performed 2 forms of transcriptional profiling—RNA-seq and quantitative RT-PCR, in single, unambiguously identified neurons from 2 small crustacean neuronal networks: The stomatogastric and cardiac ganglia. We then combined our knowledge of cell type with unbiased clustering analyses and supervised machine learning to determine how accurately functionally defined neuron types can be classified by expression profile alone. The results demonstrate that expression profile is able to capture neuronal identity most accurately when combined with multimodal information that allows for post hoc grouping, so analysis can proceed from a supervised perspective. Solely unsupervised clustering can lead to misidentification and an inability to distinguish between 2 or more cell types. Therefore, this study supports the general utility of cell identification by transcriptional profiling, but adds a caution: It is difficult or impossible to know under what conditions transcriptional profiling alone is capable of assigning cell identity. Only by combining multiple modalities of information such as physiology, morphology, or innervation target can neuronal identity be unambiguously determined.