4.7 Article

Human microglia regional heterogeneity and phenotypes determined by multiplexed single-cell mass cytometry

Journal

NATURE NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 78-+

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41593-018-0290-2

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation [SI 749/9-1, 749/10-1, CRC-TRR 241, 70112011, SFB TRR167]
  2. Berlin Institute of Health [CRG2aSP6]
  3. UK DRI (Momentum Award)
  4. NeuroMac School [SFB TRR167]
  5. Cluster of Excellence NeuroCure
  6. EU-H2020 project PACE [733006]
  7. Deutsche Krebhilfe [70112011]
  8. Brain & Behavior Research Foundation
  9. Virgo Consortium - Dutch government [FES0908]
  10. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)
  11. [Me3644/5-1]
  12. MRC [MC_PC_16031] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microglia, the specialized innate immune cells of the CNS, play crucial roles in neural development and function. Different phenotypes and functions have been ascribed to rodent microglia, but little is known about human microglia (huMG) heterogeneity. Difficulties in procuring huMG and their susceptibility to cryopreservation damage have limited large-scale studies. Here we applied multiplexed mass cytometry for a comprehensive characterization of postmortem huMG (10(3) - 10(4) cells). We determined expression levels of 57 markers on huMG isolated from up to five different brain regions of nine donors. We identified the phenotypic signature of huMG, which was distinct from peripheral myeloid cells but was comparable to fresh huMG. We detected microglia regional heterogeneity using a hybrid workflow combining Cytobank and R/Bioconductor for multidimensional data analysis. Together, these methodologies allowed us to perform high-dimensional, large-scale immunophenotyping of huMG at the single-cell level, which facilitates their unambiguous profiling in health and disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available