The emergence of transcriptional identity in somatosensory neurons
Authors: David D Ginty
Nikhil Sharma
Kali Flaherty
Daniel E Wagner
Karina Lezgiyeva
Allon M Klein
Journal: Nature (2020)
Discipline: Multidisciplinary
Keywords: primary somatosensory neuron; transcriptional maturation; developmental progression; transcriptomic atlas; sensory neurons
Affiliations: Department of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA., Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA., Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA., Department of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. ., Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. .

Abstract:  More than twelve morphologically and physiologically distinct subtypes of primary somatosensory neuron report salient features of our internal and external environments1-4. It is unclear how specialized gene expression programs emerge during development to endow these subtypes with their unique properties. To assess the developmental progression of transcriptional maturation of each subtype of principal somatosensory neuron, we generated a transcriptomic atlas of cells traversing the primary somatosensory neuron lineage in mice. Here we show that somatosensory neurogenesis gives rise to neurons in a transcriptionally unspecialized state, characterized by co-expression of transcription factors that become restricted to select subtypes as development proceeds. Single-cell transcriptomic analyses of sensory neurons from mutant mice lacking transcription factors suggest that these broad-to-restricted transcription factors coordinate subtype-specific gene expression programs in subtypes in which their expression is maintained. We also show that neuronal targets are involved in this process; disruption of the prototypic target-derived neurotrophic factor NGF leads to aberrant subtype-restricted patterns of transcription factor expression. Our findings support a model in which cues that emanate from intermediate and final target fields promote neuronal diversification in part by transitioning cells from a transcriptionally unspecialized state to transcriptionally distinct subtypes by modulating the selection of subtype-restricted transcription factors. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 ![file] , 
 #1 The two figures are the schematic descriptions of two different problems. The first one represents a 2D membrane and the second represents a 3D object. For the purpose of clean illustration, only its 2D projection of the 3D object is shown for the second problem, which happens to look similar to the first one, but the external loadings are different. , 
 #2 Thanks for the reply. Could you please clarify the difference between the external loadings? , 
 The second is completely traction given; but the first one can be either traction given or stretch given, that s why in the first one there is lemda indicated. Here the two figures represents two different objects. Even they represent the same object, there is no issue here, people might solve problems on same object with different boundary conditions, or same problem with different methods. These are just schematic drawings! One simple question: Is there difference in shape between two circles? or two squares? or do we have to make circles look different because they are in two different papers? , 
 #4 True! This could also be a potential source for the idea of generating the said schematic. It is *Lambda* oriented (with the given examples) as well. ![file] ,