a Single-cell RNA-Seq (scRNAseq) cluster annotation of H3.3.1 day 16 EMLOs (n = 15,576 cells, N = 1 biological sample) plotted with UMAP. b Canonical gut tube epithelial genes by scRNAseq with violin plots for FOXA2 (1,707/15,576 cells) and GATA6 (1,244/15,576 cells) (log2Exp). Violin plot statistics are as follows: FOXA2 (cluster 7 max = 5.36, min = 0, median = 1.59, q1 = 1, q3 = 2.32; cluster 8 max = 5.25, min = 0, median = 2, q1 = 1, q3 = 2.59), GATA6 (cluster 6 max = 3.32, min = 0, median = 0.66, q3 = 1; cluster 8 max = 3.91, min = 0, median = 1.06, q3 = 1.58; cluster 17 max = 4.09, min = 0, median = 1, q3 = 1.58). c Phase contrast of EMLO shaking cultures at day 15. Asterisk indicates gut tube (*). d Multi-dimensional visualization of SOX2 (magenta) and GATA6 (yellow) primitive gut tube in day 13 EMLO. Sagittal and transverse planes are shown. High magnification Z-slice depicts mitotic figures in apical (Ap) but not basal (Bs) epithelium. e SOX2 and GATA6 distribution as percent biomarker calculated from maximally projected Z-stacks of whole EMLOs over time. n = 60 total EMLOs measured (H3.3.1). f Length of gut tube major and minor axes over the elongation period in the three representative lines (n = 47 EMLOs measured per line). g Z-slices depict robust FOXA2 (cyan) expression in gut tube and associated TUJ1 (red) neuronal fibers at day 20. Inset is phase contrast. h Z-slice of CDH1/E-cadherin (cyan) and TUJ1 (red) IF at day 20. Maximally projected TUJ1 Z-volume is overlaid onto E-cad Z-slice to show 3D spatial relationship (right). i Increased gut tube morphological complexity at day 40 by FOXA2 and TUJ1 IF and phase contrast. Asterisk highlights meandering gut tube at this time point (*). j Identification of specified gastrointestinal cell types in day 16 EMLOs by scRNAseq that are intestinal stem cell (LGR5/SOX), esophagus–trachea junction (NKX2-1/SOX2)13, Paneth cell-like (LYZ/SOX2), and enterocyte-like (VIL1/SOX2). Individual scale bars provided. H3.3.1 EMLOs were formed in N = 11 separate biological repeat experiments over the course of this study with similar results. Phase and IF data were acquired each time (c, d, g–i). Data reported as (mean ± s.e.m.).