Cited by 170Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene Regulatory Network Analysis

Decoding gene regulation in the fly brain

Open access
Janssens, Jasper, Aibar, Sara, Taskiran, Ibrahim Ihsan, Ismail, Joy N., Gomez, Alicia Estacio, Aughey, Gabriel, Spanier, Katina I., De Rop, Florian V. +11 more·2022·Nature

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The Drosophila brain is a frequently used model in neuroscience. Single-cell transcriptome analysis 1-6, three-dimensional morphological classification 7 and electron microscopy mapping of the connectome 8,9 have revealed an immense diversity of neuronal and glial cell types that underlie an array of functional and behavioural traits in the fly. The identities of these cell types are controlled by gene regulatory networks (GRNs), involving combinations of transcription factors that bind to genomic enhancers to regulate their target genes. Here, to characterize GRNs at the cell-type level in the fly brain, we profiled the chromatin accessibility of 240,919 single cells spanning 9 developmental timepoints and integrated these data with single-cell transcriptomes. We identify more than 95,000 regulatory regions that are used in different neuronal cell types, of which 70,000 are linked to developmental trajectories involving neurogenesis, reprogramming and maturation. For 40 cell types, uniquely accessible regions were associated with their expressed transcription factors and downstream target genes through a combination of motif discovery, network inference and deep learning, creating enhancer GRNs. The enhancer architectures revealed by DeepFlyBrain lead to a better understanding of neuronal regulatory diversity and can be used to design genetic driver lines for cell types at specific timepoints, facilitating their characterization and manipulation.

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/s41586-021-04262-z

Cites

140 of 140 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?

  • In Drosophila, approximately 70-90% of accessible regions are active enhancers when their accessibility is cell type specific.

    “In Drosophila, different studies have reported that ~70-90% of accessible regions are active enhancers, when their accessibility is cell type specific10–12”

    From Enhancer grammar of liver cell types and hepatocyte zonation states (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

    The main text (p. 4) says that differentially accessible regions (DARs) often function as enhancers, but reports 588 active enhancers among 1,017 Kenyon-cell DARs overlapping tested reporter regions—about 58%. This supports the relationship between cell-type-specific accessibility and enhancer activity, but not the claimed 70–90% rate. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CNN-based enhancer modeling has recently gained traction due to its capacity for interpretation of enhancer grammar.

    “CNN-based enhancer modeling has recently gained traction, due to their capacity for the interpretation of enhancer grammar 12,19,20,74”

    From Enhancer grammar of liver cell types and hepatocyte zonation states (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

    In “Combinatorial TF expression is reflected by enhancer architecture” (page not indexed), the authors describe training a convolutional neural network on enhancer-region sequences. Figure 3 (p. 11) shows that interpreting nucleotide contributions reveals transcription-factor motifs, supporting the claimed capacity to interpret enhancer architecture. The paper does not establish that CNN-based modeling has recently gained traction or that this capacity caused its uptake. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Convolutional neural networks can model, predict, and interpret enhancer accessibility or activity from sequence.

    “we and others have recently shown the power of convolutional neural networks (CNN) to model, predict, and interpret an enhancer accessibility or activity from its sequence12,19–21.”

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

3 of the 143 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. The copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted August 12, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937doi: bioRxiv preprint https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937 · DOI
  2. (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. The copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted August 12, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937doi: bioRxiv preprint https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937 · DOI
  3. (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. The copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted August 12, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937doi: bioRxiv preprint https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.11.454937 · DOI
  4. Expression Data Using Tree-Based Methods. PLOS ONE 5, e12776 (2010).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Janssens, J., Aibar, S., Taskiran, I. I., Ismail, J. N., Gomez, A. E., Aughey, G., Spanier, K. I., De Rop, F. V., González-Blas, C. B., Dionne, M., Grimes, K., Quan, X. J., Papasokrati, D., Hulselmans, G., Makhzami, S., De Waegeneer, M., Christiaens, V., Southall, T., & Aerts, S.
Affiliations
  • VIB-KU Leuven Center for Brain & Disease Research (BE)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Aerts, Stein
Venue
Nature
Published
2022-01-05
Volume
601
Issue
7894
Pages
630-636
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W4205345182
Cited by
170
References
143
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
12.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (207467/Z/17/Z)
  • Medical Research Council (MR/L018802/1, MR/L018802/2)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/W001004/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
Keywords
Drosophila brain, gene regulatory networks, enhancers, chromatin accessibility, single-cell transcriptomics, transcription factors, transcription factor binding sites, neuronal cell types, neurogenesis, developmental trajectories
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Drosophila, Gene Expression Regulation, Transcription Factors, Gene Expression Regulation, Developmental, Gene Regulatory Networks

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