Skip to main content

Table 5 Differential expression analysis of evx1;evx2 Mutant Group 3 V0v spinal interneurons

From: Molecular analyses of zebrafish V0v spinal interneurons and identification of transcriptional regulators downstream of Evx1 and Evx2 in these cells

Gene Symbol

Interneuron Marker

Interneuron Neurotransmitter Phenotype

Hurdle Model Statistical Data

ANOVA Statistical Data

Least Squares Mean Reads

Fold-Change: Mutant 3 vs All Other Groups

Least Squares Mean Reads

Fold-Change: Mutant 3 vs All Other Groups

Mutant Group 3

All Other Groups

Mutant Group 3

All Other Groups

gata2a

KA’, KA”, and V2b

Inhibitory

1.95

1.01

↑1.94***

70.63

1.40

↑50.50***

gata3

KA’, KA”, and V2b

Inhibitory

2.34

1.01

↑2.32***

154.55

1.80

↑85.98***

tal1

KA’, KA”, and V2b

Inhibitory

2.74

1.03

↑2.65***

138.08

2.68

↑51.44***

sst1.1

KA”

Inhibitory

N.C.

N.C.

N.C.

166.67

1.00

↑166.67***

en1b

V1

Inhibitory

8.36

1.01

↑8.26***

457.91

1.56

↑294.43***

dmrt3a

dI6

Inhibitory

2.77

1.02

↑2.71***

275.63

2.71

↑101.77***

lbx1a

dI4, dI5, and dI6

Inhibitory (dI4, dI6)

Excitatory (dI5)

1.93

1.01

↑1.91***

59.87

1.72

↑34.78***

islet1a

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

1.29

1.01

↑1.28***

21.25

1.69

↑12.58***

islet2a

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

1.46

1.01

↑1.45***

54.58

1.56

↑35.06***

islet2b

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

1.21

1.00

↑1.21***

18.15

1.32

↑13.73***

mnx1

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

1.42

1.00

↑1.42***

36.21

1.16

↑31.19***

mnx2a

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

N.C.

N.C.

N.C.

15.16

1.00

↑15.16***

mnx2b

Motoneurons

Acetylcholinergic

1.41

1.03

↑1.37***

25.61

3.66

↑6.99***

sim1a

V3

Excitatory

1.00

1.00

↓1.00

1.00

1.30

↓1.30

vsx2

V2a

Excitatory

1.12

1.02

↑1.10

15.06

3.26

↑4.62

tlx3b

dI3 and dI5

Excitatory

N.C

N.C

N.C

2.11

1.00

↑2.11**

foxp2

dI2

Excitatory

1.19

1.16

↑1.03

19.54

10.47

↑1.87

barhl2

dI1

Excitatory

N.C.

N.C.

N.C.

1.00

1.73

↓1.73

  1. Gene-specific analyses of differential expression, created through Hurdle model (columns 4–6) and ANOVA (columns 7–9) statistical comparisons between distinct cell clusters in our 48 h evx1i232/+;evx2sa140/+ heterozygote incross single-cell atlas (see Fig. 6A and also Methods for experimental details and rationale for using both statistical methods). For these comparisons, the ANOVA data is probably the most robust, as the number of cells in each sub-cluster is relatively small (see Methods for more information). We also include the Hurdle model data for completeness. Column 1 shows the gene symbol. Column 2 indicates the spinal neuron types that normally express the gene. Column 3 indicates the neurotransmitter phenotype for these neurons. Columns 4 and 7 show least squares mean read counts for cells in Mutant Group 3, and columns 5 and 8 show least squares mean read counts for cells in all the other clusters combined, respectively. Columns 6 and 9 show fold-change values. ↑ = fold-change increase, ↓ = fold-change decrease in Mutant Group 3 (the antecedent (first) population) compared to all other populations combined (the consequent (second) population). Statistically significant (P < 0.05) values are indicated in bold. *** P < 0.001. ** P < 0.01. N.C. = Not Calculated. Hurdle model of differential expression analysis cannot be calculated, usually because expression was too low or not present in one of the groups being compared. Additional data for this comparison is available in Supp. Data Tables 2 (Hurdle model data) and 3 (ANOVA data)
Back to article page

Neural Development

ISSN: 1749-8104