Cited by 1,775Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Conserved cell types with divergent features in human versus mouse cortex

Open access
Hodge, Rebecca D., Bakken, Trygve E., Miller, Jeremy A., Smith, Kimberly A., Barkan, Eliza R., Graybuck, Lucas T., Close, Jennie L., Long, Brian +56 more·2019·Nature

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Elucidating the cellular architecture of the human cerebral cortex is central to understanding our cognitive abilities and susceptibility to disease. Here we used single-nucleus RNA-sequencing analysis to perform a comprehensive study of cell types in the middle temporal gyrus of human cortex. We identified a highly diverse set of excitatory and inhibitory neuron types that are mostly sparse, with excitatory types being less layer-restricted than expected. Comparison to similar mouse cortex single-cell RNA-sequencing datasets revealed a surprisingly well-conserved cellular architecture that enables matching of homologous types and predictions of properties of human cell types. Despite this general conservation, we also found extensive differences between homologous human and mouse cell types, including marked alterations in proportions, laminar distributions, gene expression and morphology. These species-specific features emphasize the importance of directly studying human brain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-019-1506-7

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The more-advanced animal brains have the largest numbers of neuron types, with highly complex interactions.

    “As a third example of the great elaboration and specialization associated with consciousness, the more-advanced animal brains have the largest numbers of neuron types, with highly complex interactions (Strausfeld, 2012; Feinberg and Mallatt, 2016a; Hodge et al., 2019).”

    From Phenomenal Consciousness and Emergence: Eliminating the Explanatory Gap (2020) · cites this paper as Hodge et al., 2019

    The Results section (Transcriptomic taxonomy of cell types; page not provided) identifies 69 neuronal types in the sampled human cortex, supporting substantial neuronal diversity. But the Results section (Human and mouse cell type homology; page not provided) says some subclasses are more diverse in humans and others in mice. The paper does not establish that more-advanced animal brains have the largest numbers of neuron types or demonstrate highly complex interactions among them. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nuclei were sorted using a standard gating strategy to exclude multiplets.

    “nuclei were sorted using a standard gating strategy to exclude multiplets24”

    From Integrated multimodal cell atlas of Alzheimer’s disease (2024) · cites this paper as [24]

  • 8 out of 14 modules showed greater intra-module correlation than a comparable random gene set in the adult human brain dataset from Hodge et al.

    “8 out of 14 modules showed greater intra-module correlation than a comparable random gene set in the adult human brain dataset from Hodge et al (30) (Fig. 4B).”
  • Multiplex FISH is already used to measure the proportions of transcriptomic types in brain tissue.

    “In addition, multiplex FISH is already being used to measure the proportions of transcriptomic types within a given brain tissue (Hodge et al., 2019; Moffitt et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2020).”
  • Single-cell RNA-sequencing studies have systematically characterized and classified cell types in individual regions of isocortex and hippocampus.

    “Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) studies have systematically characterized and classified cell types in individual regions of isocortex and hippocampus”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hodge, R. D., Bakken, T. E., Miller, J. A., Smith, K. A., Barkan, E. R., Graybuck, L. T., Close, J. L., Long, B., Johansen, N., Penn, O., Yao, Z., Eggermont, J., Höllt, T., Levi, B. P., Shehata, S. I., Aevermann, B., Beller, A., Bertagnolli, D., Brouner, K., Casper, T., Cobbs, C., Dalley, R., Dee, N., Ding, S.-L., Ellenbogen, R. G., Fong, O., Garren, E., Goldy, J., Gwinn, R. P., Hirschstein, D., Keene, C. D., Keshk, M., Ko, A. L., Lathia, K., Mahfouz, A., Maltzer, Z., McGraw, M., Nguyen, T. N., Nyhus, J., Ojemann, J. G., Oldre, A., Parry, S., Reynolds, S., Rimorin, C., Shapovalova, N. V., Somasundaram, S., Szafer, A., Thomsen, E. R., Tieu, M., Quon, G., Scheuermann, R. H., Yuste, R., Sunkin, S. M., Lelieveldt, B., Feng, D., Ng, L., Bernard, A., Hawrylycz, M., Phillips, J. W., Tasic, B., Zeng, H., Jones, A. R., Koch, C., & Lein, E. S.
Affiliations
  • Allen Institute for Brain Science (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • J. Craig Venter Institute (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Swedish Medical Center (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Lein, Ed S.
Venue
Nature
Published
2019-08-21
Volume
573
Issue
7772
Pages
61-68
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2969948459
Cited by
1,775
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 199 · 2025: 242 · 2024: 275 · 2023: 269 · 2022: 235 · 2021: 289 · 2020: 212 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
64.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (12720, 12721)
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01mh114812-03, MH114812-02)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (U01MH105982, U01MH114812, U19MH114830)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM008497)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
human cerebral cortex, middle temporal gyrus, cortical cell types, excitatory neurons, inhibitory neurons, single-nucleus RNA sequencing, human-mouse comparison, cortical laminar organization, species differences, neuronal morphology, gene expression
MeSH terms
RNA-Seq, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Animals, Astrocytes, Cerebral Cortex, Biological Evolution, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neural Inhibition, Neurons, Species Specificity, Principal Component Analysis, Mice, Young Adult, Single-Cell Analysis, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review