Spatial Transcriptomics Technologies

A Comprehensive Guide to Spatially-Resolved Gene Expression Analysis (2016-2025)
From the foundational spatial transcriptomics method to cutting-edge 3D thick-tissue profiling: Understanding how to map gene expression while preserving spatial context in tissues. Based on systematic analysis of 17+ landmark papers spanning nearly a decade of innovation.
17+
Papers Analyzed
(2016-2025)
3
Technology
Categories
200 um
Max Tissue
Depth (3D)
10,000+
Genes Profiled
Simultaneously

Evolution of Spatial Transcriptomics (2016-2025)

Evolution of Spatial Transcriptomics Platforms Timeline

Figure 1. Timeline of spatial transcriptomics technology development. Upper track (teal): sequencing-based methods from original ST (2016) through Visium, Slide-seq, Seq-Scope (2021), Stereo-seq (2022), to Visium HD (2023). Lower track (orange-coral): imaging-based methods from MERFISH foundation through STARmap, seqFISH+, MERSCOPE, Xenium, and CosMx. Gold stars indicate breakthroughs. Bottom scale shows resolution progression from 100μm to subcellular.

What is Spatial Transcriptomics?

Spatial transcriptomics refers to a collection of methods that measure gene expression while preserving the spatial location of transcripts within tissues. Unlike traditional RNA-seq that requires tissue homogenization (losing spatial information) or single-cell RNA-seq that requires cell dissociation (losing tissue context), spatial transcriptomics maintains the native tissue architecture while profiling the transcriptome.

Why Spatial Context Matters

Three Major Technology Categories

1. Sequencing-Based Methods (Capture + Seq)

Use spatially-barcoded oligonucleotides to capture mRNA at defined positions, followed by next-generation sequencing. Offer whole-transcriptome coverage but lower spatial resolution.

Spatial Transcriptomics (2016) - 100 um spots
Slide-seq/V2 (2019/2021) - 10 um beads
HDST (2019) - 2 um features
Seq-Scope (2021) - Subcellular resolution
Stereo-seq (2022) - Nanoscale resolution
Visium/VisiumHD (10x) - Commercial platform

2. Imaging-Based Methods (In Situ)

Detect transcripts directly in tissue using fluorescence hybridization or in situ sequencing. Achieve single-molecule/subcellular resolution but typically target specific gene panels.

seqFISH+ (2019) - 10,000 genes, super-resolution
MERFISH - Error-robust barcoding
STARmap (2018) - 3D in situ sequencing
Deep-STARmap (2025) - 200 um thick tissue
Xenium (10x) - Commercial in situ
CosMx SMI (NanoString) - 1000+ genes

3. Emerging & Multi-Modal Methods

Novel approaches combining transcriptomics with other modalities (protein, translation, temporal dynamics) or using innovative readout strategies.

SPOTS (2023) - Spatial protein + transcriptome
Deep-RIBOmap (2025) - Spatial translatomics
ESPRESSO (2025) - Spatiotemporal omics
GeoMx DSP (NanoString) - Targeted profiling
Spatial Transcriptomics Platforms Comparison Diagram

Figure 2. Platform classification by spatial resolution (y-axis) and gene coverage (x-axis). Upper left (coral): imaging-based platforms (Xenium, CosMx, MERSCOPE, STARmap) with subcellular resolution and targeted panels. Upper right (teal): high-resolution sequencing (Stereo-seq, Seq-Scope, Visium HD, HDST) with whole transcriptome. Middle right (golden): near single-cell sequencing (Slide-seqV2). Lower right (light teal): classic sequencing (Visium, GeoMx WTA). Lower left: ROI-based targeted (GeoMx panel mode). Stars denote subcellular + whole transcriptome breakthroughs.

Technology Comparison Guide

Spatial Resolution Comparison

Figure 3. Visual comparison of spatial resolution from multi-cell regions to individual transcripts. Left to right: GeoMx DSP ROI (50-600μm, 50-100+ cells), Visium (55μm, 5-10 cells), Slide-seqV2 (10μm, 1-3 cells), Visium HD/HDST (2μm, single-cell), Stereo-seq/Seq-Scope (0.5μm, subcellular, ★), Xenium/CosMx/MERSCOPE (<0.1μm, individual transcripts). Yellow outlines: sequencing-based; coral outlines: imaging-based. Sequencing platforms capture ~20K genes; imaging platforms detect 500-6,000 genes.

Technical Workflows Comparison

Figure 4. Technical workflows across three approaches. Left (Array-based Capture): tissue permeabilization → mRNA capture on barcoded spots → reverse transcription → library prep → demultiplexing; output: Spot × Gene matrix. Center (In Situ Barcoding): spatial barcode sequencing → tissue overlay → mRNA capture → sequencing → high-resolution mapping; output: subcellular spatial matrix (★). Right (Imaging-based): probe hybridization → platform-specific detection (combinatorial/RCA/ISS) → cyclic imaging → barcode decoding → single-molecule localization; output: (x,y,gene_id) coordinates. Bottom table compares resolution, genes, output format, FFPE compatibility, and throughput.

Resolution vs Coverage Trade-off

Method Resolution Gene Coverage Tissue Depth Best For
Visium 55 um spots Whole transcriptome 10 um sections Discovery, FFPE tissues
VisiumHD 2-8 um bins Whole transcriptome 10 um sections High-resolution discovery
Slide-seq V2 10 um beads Whole transcriptome 10 um sections Near-cellular resolution
Stereo-seq ~500 nm Whole transcriptome Thin sections Subcellular patterns
Xenium Subcellular 100-5000 genes 5-10 um Targeted, clinical FFPE
seqFISH+ Super-resolution 10,000 genes ~5 um Discovery + localization
CosMx SMI Subcellular 1000+ genes 5 um High-plex imaging
Deep-STARmap Single-cell 1000+ genes 60-200 um 3D architecture
GeoMx DSP ROI-based Whole transcriptome 10 um Targeted enrichment

Choosing the Right Technology

For Discovery Studies (Unbiased)

Use sequencing-based methods (Visium, VisiumHD, Slide-seq, Stereo-seq) when you need whole-transcriptome coverage without predefined gene targets. Best for hypothesis generation and atlas building.

For Targeted Validation (High Resolution)

Use imaging-based methods (Xenium, CosMx, seqFISH+, MERFISH) when you have specific genes of interest and need single-cell or subcellular resolution. Best for validating scRNA-seq findings.

For 3D Tissue Architecture

Use Deep-STARmap/RIBOmap for thick tissue (60-200 um) profiling to capture complete 3D cellular organization. Essential for studying cell-cell interactions and spatial clustering that are missed in 2D.

For Clinical FFPE Samples

Use Visium, Xenium, or GeoMx — platforms optimized for archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue.

Quality Check: Assess RNA integrity using DV200 (% of RNA fragments >200 nucleotides). Aim for DV200 ≥50% for optimal results.

For Multi-Modal Integration

Use SPOTS for simultaneous protein + transcriptome, Deep-RIBOmap for transcription + translation, or combine Xenium + Visium + Chromium for comprehensive multi-platform profiling.

Platform Selection Decision Flowchart

Figure 5. Decision flowchart for platform selection. Starting from sample type: FFPE samples → subcellular (Xenium, CosMx, MERSCOPE), multi-cell ROI (GeoMx), or whole transcriptome (Visium HD). Fresh frozen → Discovery path by resolution: subcellular (Stereo-seq, Seq-Scope ★), single-cell (Visium HD, Slide-seqV2), multi-cell (Visium); Hypothesis-driven path → imaging platforms or GeoMx; Protein+RNA → CosMx, Xenium, GeoMx; Rare cells → GeoMx DSP. Quick reference table summarizes recommendations by experimental need.

Landmark Papers Organized by Methodological Approach

1. Sequencing-Based Spatial Arrays (Capturing RNA onto surfaces)

Why these are grouped: These methods work by placing a tissue section onto a slide printed with barcoded capture spots (like beads or DNA nanoballs). The RNA is released from the tissue, captured on the surface, and then sequenced off-slide. The resolution is determined by the physical size and density of the capture spots on the array.

Spatial Transcriptomics Method (The Original) (2016)

2016 Science

Stahl et al. - The foundational paper introducing genome-wide spatial transcriptomics using arrayed barcoded primers on glass slides (the predecessor to 10x Genomics Visium).

Key Innovations:
  • First spatial genome-wide approach
  • 100 um diameter spots with positional barcodes
  • Compatible with H&E staining for histology overlap

Slide-seq V2 (High-Resolution Beads) (2021)

2021 Nat Biotech

Stickels et al. - A major improvement in array resolution using tightly packed, tiny microbeads instead of printed spots to achieve near-cellular resolution.

Key Features:
  • 10 um bead resolution (near-cellular)
  • 10-fold sensitivity improvement over original Slide-seq
  • Genome-wide capture

Stereo-seq (Nanoscale Resolution) (2022)

2022 Cell

Chen et al. - Utilizing DNA nanoball arrays to achieve the highest resolution among array-based methods, enabling subcellular definitions over large areas.

Key Features:
  • Nanoscale resolution (~500 nm center-to-center)
  • Very large field of view capability (whole embryos)
  • Subcellular resolution with whole transcriptome

2. Imaging-Based In Situ Technologies (Visualizing RNA directly in tissue)

Why these are grouped: Instead of capturing RNA onto a slide, these methods leave the RNA inside the tissue cells. They use fluorescent probes and sophisticated microscopes to capture images of individual RNA molecules over multiple rounds of hybridization. They offer very high (subcellular) resolution but usually target a predefined panel of genes rather than the whole transcriptome.

STARmap (3D In Situ Sequencing) (2018)

2018 Science

Wang et al. - An innovative approach combining hydrogel tissue clearing with error-correcting sequencing directly inside intact tissue blocks.

Key Innovations:
  • Truly 3D intact-tissue RNA sequencing (150 um thick)
  • SEDAL sequencing with error correction
  • Bypasses reverse transcription using SNAIL probes

seqFISH+ (Transcriptome-Scale Imaging) (2019)

2019 Nature

Eng et al. - A landmark paper demonstrating that fluorescence imaging could scale to detect 10,000+ genes at super-resolution using clever color-coding strategies.

Key Innovations:
  • Massive multiplexing (10,000 genes) via pseudocolour barcoding
  • Subcellular mRNA localization at super-resolution
  • High sensitivity (~35,000 transcripts detected per cell)

CosMx SMI (Commercial High-Plex Imaging) (2022)

2022 Nat Biotech

He et al. - A representative paper for the new generation of robust, commercial single-molecule imaging platforms suitable for difficult clinical samples.

Key Features:
  • High-plex single-molecule imaging (1000+ gene panels)
  • Robust performance on FFPE tissue sections
  • Focus on clinical translation and reproducibility

3. Beyond 2D RNA: Multi-Modal, 3D, and Temporal Expansions

Why these are grouped: These papers represent the "next frontiers" of spatial biology. They push beyond standard 2D transcriptomics by adding new modalities (like proteins or active translation), analyzing thick 3D tissues, or adding the fourth dimension of time (live-cell tracking).

SPOTS (Spatial Protein & Transcriptome) (2023)

2023 Nat Biotech

Ben-Chetrit et al. - A pioneering method combining whole transcriptome spatial profiling (Visium) with protein detection in the exact same tissue section.

Key Innovations:
  • True multi-modal integration (RNA + Protein)
  • Uses DNA-barcoded antibodies readable by sequencing
  • Allows correlation of gene expression vs. actual protein levels

Deep-STARmap & Deep-RIBOmap (3D & Translatomics) (2025)

2025 Nat Methods

Sui et al. - Advances 3D imaging into thicker tissues more cheaply, and introduces "translatomics"—mapping actively translating ribosomes, not just total mRNA.

Key Innovations:
  • Scalable 3D profiling in thick blocks (up to 200 um)
  • Significant cost reduction via CNVK photocrosslinking
  • First spatial translatomics method (RIBOmap)

ESPRESSO (Spatiotemporal Live-Cell Omics) (2025)

2025 Nat Methods

Scipioni et al. - Moves from static snapshots to dynamic movies. It uses organelle phenotyping to track cell states over 24+ hours in live cells.

Key Innovations:
  • Adds the temporal dimension (4D tracking)
  • Hyperspectral imaging and CNN enhancement
  • Tracks live-cell state transitions in 2D and 3D spheroids

4. Benchmarking, Biological Application, and Future Outlook

Why these are grouped: These papers are less about inventing a new method and more about making sense of the existing ones. They include direct head-to-head comparisons of platforms, deep biological applications demonstrating real-world utility, and high-level perspectives on where the field is headed.

Visium-GeoMx-Chromium Comparison (Benchmarking) (2025)

2025 Nat Comm

Dong et al. - A crucial resource for users trying to choose a platform. It provides a comprehensive comparison of three major commercial technologies on difficult FFPE tumor samples.

Key Findings:
  • Compares unbiased sampling (Visium) vs. targeted enrichment (GeoMx)
  • Validates FFPE compatibility across major platforms
  • Highlights the importance of computational deconvolution

Spatial TRM Cell Diversity (Biological Application) (2025)

2025 Nature

Reina-Campos et al. - A prime example of how these tools are used for biological discovery. It integrates multiple spatial platforms to reveal how tissue architecture dictates immune cell behavior.

Key Innovations:
  • Advanced multi-platform integration (Xenium, MERSCOPE, VisiumHD)
  • Development of a new tissue coordinate system (IMAP)
  • Links spatial niches to immune cell maintenance

Human Cell Atlas Perspective (Future Outlook) (2024)

2024 Nature

Rood et al. - A high-level view of how spatial data will be integrated into global efforts like the Human Cell Atlas to create AI-driven foundation models of biology.

Key Perspectives:
  • Integrating spatial maps with single-cell census data
  • The role of spatial data in understanding development and disease
  • The future of AI/ML approaches for atlas-scale analysis

Common Analysis Workflows

Data Formats and Structures

Figure 6. Data output formats across platforms. Panel A (Sequencing-based): Spot × Gene count matrix with coordinates; high-res platforms require segmentation (⚠). Formats: MTX, H5AD, Parquet. Panel B (Imaging-based): transcript coordinate table (transcript_id, x, y, gene); requires cell segmentation. Formats: Parquet, CSV, Zarr. Panel C (Unified): all platforms converge to Cell × Gene matrix with spatial coordinates in AnnData/H5AD structure containing X (counts), obs (cell metadata), var (gene metadata), obsm (spatial coordinates), layers, and uns (images).

Computational Challenges by Platform

Figure 7. Platform-specific computational challenges. Low-res Sequencing (Visium): deconvolution, reference integration; tools: cell2location, RCTD; difficulty: medium. High-res Sequencing (Visium HD, Stereo-seq): cell segmentation (⚠), scalability, binning strategy; tools: Cellpose, Baysor; difficulty: high. Imaging-based: cell segmentation, assignment errors (~5-15%), panel limitations; tools: Cellpose, Baysor, StarDist; difficulty: high. ROI-based (GeoMx): low sample size, cell mixtures in AOIs; difficulty: low-medium (computation), high (statistics). Shared challenges (all platforms): batch effects, normalization, spatial statistics, cell-cell interactions.

1. Data Processing & Quality Control

2. Cell Type Annotation

3. Spatial Analysis

Key Software Packages

Package Language Primary Use
Scanpy/Squidpy Python Single-cell and spatial analysis
Seurat R Comprehensive spatial workflows
Cell2location Python Cell type deconvolution
CellPose Python Cell segmentation
Baysor Julia Transcript-based segmentation
FuseMap Python Spatial atlas integration
BayesSpace R Spatial clustering enhancement