hansen7/spatialagent_human huggingface dataset:
Gene: BTBD11 (ENSG00000151136), rank 1
Marker for: Inhib (vs OPC)
Expression ratio: Inhib/OPC: 8.546; std logFC = 2.992
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC004852.2 (ENSG00000278254), rank 3
Marker for: OPC (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: OPC/Inhib: 47.123; std logFC = 8.526
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: OBI1-AS1 (ENSG00000234377), rank 4
Marker for: Astro (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: Astro/Oligo: 11.975; std logFC = 4.39
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ITIH5 (ENSG00000123243), rank 5
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Micro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Micro: 35.973; std logFC = 6.14
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: DOCK8 (ENSG00000107099), rank 6
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 16.492; std logFC = 9.124
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: BTBD11 (ENSG00000151136), rank 7
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit_L2/3: 5.688; std logFC = 3.009
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC004852.2 (ENSG00000278254), rank 9
Marker for: OPC (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: OPC/Inhib: 47.123; std logFC = 8.447
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MAP1B (ENSG00000131711), rank 10
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.128; std logFC = 1.698
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CBLN2 (ENSG00000141668), rank 11
Marker for: Excit_L3 (vs Excit_L5/6)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/Excit_L5/6: 1.375; std logFC = 1.969
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: OBI1-AS1 (ENSG00000234377), rank 12
Marker for: Astro (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: Astro/Oligo: 11.975; std logFC = 4.724
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ITIH5 (ENSG00000123243), rank 13
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Excit_L3/4/5)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Excit_L3/4/5: 25.242; std logFC = 6.171
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: DOCK8 (ENSG00000107099), rank 14
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 16.492; std logFC = 9.083
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MCTP2 (ENSG00000140563), rank 15
Marker for: Excit_L6 (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Excit_L6/EndoMural: 8.076; std logFC = 3.04
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: THEMIS (ENSG00000172673), rank 16
Marker for: Excit_L5/6 (vs Excit_L5)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/6/Excit_L5: 2.498; std logFC = 1.966
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AP003066.1 (ENSG00000254587), rank 17
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L4: 3.329; std logFC = 2.632
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GAD2 (ENSG00000136750), rank 18
Marker for: Inhib (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Oligo: 14.031; std logFC = 2.876
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: PDGFRA (ENSG00000134853), rank 19
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 18.218; std logFC = 6.623
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CABP1 (ENSG00000157782), rank 20
Marker for: Excit (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: Excit/Oligo: 4.972; std logFC = 1.919
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ADGRV1 (ENSG00000164199), rank 21
Marker for: Astro (vs Excit)
Expression ratio: Astro/Excit: 8.672; std logFC = 4.111
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: EBF1 (ENSG00000164330), rank 22
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Inhib: 21.886; std logFC = 5.283
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: APBB1IP (ENSG00000077420), rank 23
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 27.757; std logFC = 9.006
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GAD2 (ENSG00000136750), rank 24
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit_L2/3: 3.387; std logFC = 2.925
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: PDGFRA (ENSG00000134853), rank 25
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 18.218; std logFC = 6.636
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CALM1 (ENSG00000198668), rank 26
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.151; std logFC = 1.639
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CUX2 (ENSG00000111249), rank 27
Marker for: Excit_L3 (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/Inhib: 1.563; std logFC = 1.965
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ADGRV1 (ENSG00000164199), rank 28
Marker for: Astro (vs Excit_L3)
Expression ratio: Astro/Excit_L3: 7.458; std logFC = 4.167
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: EBF1 (ENSG00000164330), rank 29
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Inhib: 21.886; std logFC = 5.626
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: APBB1IP (ENSG00000077420), rank 30
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 27.757; std logFC = 8.993
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC099517.1 (ENSG00000287176), rank 31
Marker for: Excit_L5/6 (vs Excit_L5)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/6/Excit_L5: 1.39; std logFC = 1.947
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC073091.3 (ENSG00000287172), rank 32
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L5/6)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L5/6: 1.616; std logFC = 2.27
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MEGF11 (ENSG00000157890), rank 34
Marker for: OPC (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: OPC/Inhib: 15.485; std logFC = 6.536
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MOBP (ENSG00000168314), rank 37
Marker for: Oligo (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Oligo/Excit_L2/3: 8.248; std logFC = 3.499
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MEGF11 (ENSG00000157890), rank 38
Marker for: OPC (vs Excit_L6)
Expression ratio: OPC/Excit_L6: 7.63; std logFC = 6.521
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TUBA1B (ENSG00000123416), rank 39
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.183; std logFC = 1.61
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TSHZ2 (ENSG00000182463), rank 40
Marker for: Excit_L4 (vs Excit_L5)
Expression ratio: Excit_L4/Excit_L5: 1.385; std logFC = 1.826
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AL137139.2 (ENSG00000286757), rank 41
Marker for: Astro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Astro/EndoMural: 3.838; std logFC = 3.686
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: EPAS1 (ENSG00000116016), rank 42
Marker for: EndoMural (vs OPC)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/OPC: 5.63; std logFC = 5.094
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LINC00343 (ENSG00000226620), rank 44
Marker for: Excit_L5/6 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/6/Excit_L4: 3.478; std logFC = 1.871
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AL033539.2 (ENSG00000286954), rank 45
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L4: 2.223; std logFC = 2.247
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GRIP2 (ENSG00000144596), rank 46
Marker for: Inhib (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Inhib/EndoMural: 11.163; std logFC = 2.667
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: BX284613.2 (ENSG00000231424), rank 47
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 6.46; std logFC = 6.357
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LINC00299 (ENSG00000236790), rank 48
Marker for: Astro (vs Excit)
Expression ratio: Astro/Excit: 6.432; std logFC = 3.386
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FLT1 (ENSG00000102755), rank 49
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Micro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Micro: 13.399; std logFC = 4.564
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TBXAS1 (ENSG00000059377), rank 50
Marker for: Micro (vs Astro)
Expression ratio: Micro/Astro: 29.351; std logFC = 7.055
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ZNF385D (ENSG00000151789), rank 51
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit_L2/3: 2.269; std logFC = 2.733
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: STMN2 (ENSG00000104435), rank 53
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.129; std logFC = 1.509
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FLT1 (ENSG00000102755), rank 54
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Micro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Micro: 13.399; std logFC = 4.59
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TBXAS1 (ENSG00000059377), rank 55
Marker for: Micro (vs Astro)
Expression ratio: Micro/Astro: 29.351; std logFC = 7.016
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC019211.1 (ENSG00000239498), rank 56
Marker for: Excit_L5/6 (vs Excit_L3)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/6/Excit_L3: 1.418; std logFC = 1.727
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TLL1 (ENSG00000038295), rank 57
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L5/6)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L5/6: 2.193; std logFC = 2.238
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: PRDM16 (ENSG00000142611), rank 60
Marker for: Astro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Astro/EndoMural: 13.887; std logFC = 3.311
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: COBLL1 (ENSG00000082438), rank 61
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Excit)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Excit: 9.298; std logFC = 4.47
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CSF2RA (ENSG00000198223), rank 62
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 62.433; std logFC = 6.893
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GRIP2 (ENSG00000144596), rank 63
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit_L2/3: 3.502; std logFC = 2.689
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: BX284613.2 (ENSG00000231424), rank 65
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 6.46; std logFC = 6.278
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CALM3 (ENSG00000160014), rank 66
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.151; std logFC = 1.488
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC092957.1 (ENSG00000243620), rank 67
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Astro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Astro: 18.735; std logFC = 4.483
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CSF2RA (ENSG00000198223), rank 68
Marker for: Micro (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Micro/Excit_L2/3: 59.22; std logFC = 6.845
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LINC02718 (ENSG00000255418), rank 69
Marker for: Excit_L6 (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Excit_L6/EndoMural: 11.068; std logFC = 2.341
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CASC15 (ENSG00000272168), rank 70
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L4: 1.717; std logFC = 2.228
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ENPP2 (ENSG00000136960), rank 71
Marker for: Oligo (vs OPC)
Expression ratio: Oligo/OPC: 9.962; std logFC = 3.096
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LHFPL3 (ENSG00000187416), rank 72
Marker for: OPC (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: OPC/Inhib: 7.169; std logFC = 5.679
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC092957.1 (ENSG00000243620), rank 73
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Astro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Astro: 18.735; std logFC = 4.458
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FYB1 (ENSG00000082074), rank 74
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 17.214; std logFC = 6.386
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LHFPL3 (ENSG00000187416), rank 75
Marker for: OPC (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: OPC/Inhib: 7.169; std logFC = 5.728
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: NORAD (ENSG00000260032), rank 76
Marker for: Excit_L3/4/5 (vs Excit_L4)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/4/5/Excit_L4: 1.179; std logFC = 1.487
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC008574.1 (ENSG00000251293), rank 77
Marker for: Excit_L3 (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Excit_L3/Excit_L2/3: 2.093; std logFC = 1.81
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: PRDM16 (ENSG00000142611), rank 78
Marker for: Astro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Astro/EndoMural: 13.887; std logFC = 3.304
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FYB1 (ENSG00000082074), rank 79
Marker for: Micro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Micro/EndoMural: 17.214; std logFC = 6.322
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ADAMTSL1 (ENSG00000178031), rank 80
Marker for: Excit_L6 (vs Excit_L5)
Expression ratio: Excit_L6/Excit_L5: 2.514; std logFC = 2.298
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ANK1 (ENSG00000029534), rank 81
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit: 7.586; std logFC = 2.4
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FERMT1 (ENSG00000101311), rank 82
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 42.196; std logFC = 5.447
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: MLIP (ENSG00000146147), rank 83
Marker for: Excit (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: Excit/Oligo: 7.36; std logFC = 1.561
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GLI3 (ENSG00000106571), rank 84
Marker for: Astro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Astro/EndoMural: 4.84; std logFC = 3.188
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ATP10A (ENSG00000206190), rank 85
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Excit)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Excit: 25.868; std logFC = 4.419
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ANK1 (ENSG00000029534), rank 86
Marker for: Inhib (vs Excit_L2/3)
Expression ratio: Inhib/Excit_L2/3: 2.656; std logFC = 2.526
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ENPP2 (ENSG00000136960), rank 87
Marker for: Oligo (vs OPC)
Expression ratio: Oligo/OPC: 9.962; std logFC = 3.151
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: COL9A1 (ENSG00000112280), rank 88
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 19.245; std logFC = 5.402
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: GLI3 (ENSG00000106571), rank 89
Marker for: Astro (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: Astro/EndoMural: 4.84; std logFC = 3.171
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ATP10A (ENSG00000206190), rank 90
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Excit_L6)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Excit_L6: 13.315; std logFC = 4.415
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: COL9A1 (ENSG00000112280), rank 92
Marker for: OPC (vs EndoMural)
Expression ratio: OPC/EndoMural: 19.245; std logFC = 5.397
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: CARMN (ENSG00000249669), rank 93
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Oligo)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Oligo: 62.359; std logFC = 4.272
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: LINC01374 (ENSG00000280560), rank 94
Marker for: Micro (vs Inhib)
Expression ratio: Micro/Inhib: 30.11; std logFC = 6.098
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: TMEM144 (ENSG00000164124), rank 95
Marker for: Oligo (vs Astro)
Expression ratio: Oligo/Astro: 5.573; std logFC = 2.961
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: FERMT1 (ENSG00000101311), rank 96
Marker for: OPC (vs Excit_L5)
Expression ratio: OPC/Excit_L5: 36.336; std logFC = 5.401
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ABCG2 (ENSG00000118777), rank 97
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Micro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Micro: 15.694; std logFC = 4.278
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: AC109466.1 (ENSG00000241956), rank 98
Marker for: Excit_L5 (vs Excit_L5/6)
Expression ratio: Excit_L5/Excit_L5/6: 1.748; std logFC = 2.099
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: RFX4 (ENSG00000111783), rank 100
Marker for: Astro (vs OPC)
Expression ratio: Astro/OPC: 4.136; std logFC = 3.027
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy
Gene: ABCG2 (ENSG00000118777), rank 101
Marker for: EndoMural (vs Micro)
Expression ratio: EndoMural/Micro: 15.694; std logFC = 4.265
Reasoning: From literature https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh1938 , I didn't use the scdata because I think it can be very noisy