The mammalian central nervous system (CNS) contains a remarkable array of neural cells, each with a complex pattern of connections that together generate perceptions and higher brain functions. Here we describe a large-scale screen to create an atlas of CNS gene expression at the cellular level, and to provide a library of verified bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) vectors and transgenic mouse lines that offer experimental access to CNS regions, cell classes and pathways. We illustrate the use of this atlas to derive novel insights into gene function in neural cells, and into principal steps of CNS development. The atlas, library of BAC vectors and BAC transgenic mice generated in this screen provide a rich resource that allows a broad array of investigations not previously available to the neuroscience community.

No abstract

Summary Comparative analysis of BACarray data can provide important insights into complex biological systems. As demonstrated in the accompanying paper, BACarray translational profiling permits comprehensive studies of translated mRNAs in genetically defined cell populations following physiological perturbations. To establish the generality of this approach, we present BACarray translational profiles for twenty four CNS cell populations, and identify known cell-specific and enriched transcripts for each population. We report thousands of cell-specific mRNAs that were not detected in whole tissue microarray studies, and provide examples that demonstrate the benefits deriving from comparative analysis. To provide a foundation for further biological and in silico studies, we provide a resource of sixteen transgenic mouse lines, their corresponding anatomic characterization, and BACarray translational profiles for cell types from a variety of CNS structures. This resource will enable a wide spectrum of molecular and mechanistic studies of both well known and previously uncharacterized neural cell populations.

In the above article, Figure 2A is stated to summarize data from Figures 1A and 1B; however, we inadvertently displayed a plot of a different data set that was collected with a similar but slightly different experimental design. The data in Figures 1A and 1B are from an experiment in which one group of flies underwent mock conditioning and an independent group was conditioned with electric shock, whereas the data in Figure 2A were from an experiment in which the same population of flies sequentially underwent mock conditioning and actual conditioning.We provide here a corrected graph for Figure 2A plotting the data from Figure 1. The new plot does not affect the description of the results in the paper or the conclusions drawn. We apologize for any inconvenience caused by this error.